Saudi judge refuses to annul marriage of girl, 8

  • Thread starter Thread starter jastor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jastor

Guest
A loving religion?

cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/23/saudi.arabia.child.marriage/index.html

(CNN) – A Saudi judge recently refused to annul a marriage between an 8-year-old girl and a 47-year-old man – a union apparently arranged by the girl’s father to settle his debts – a lawyer in the case told CNN.

On Saturday, the judge, Sheikh Habib Abdallah al-Habib, dismissed a petition brought by the girl’s mother because she “is not the legal guardian of the girl,” the woman’s lawyer Abdullah al-Jutaili said.

“Therefore, she cannot represent her daughter in these proceedings,” al-Jutaili said.

Her parents are separated, he said.
Don’t Miss
Code:
* Clinton's foundation got millions from Saudis, Gates
According to the lawyer, the girl’s father arranged the marriage in order to settle his debts with the man, who is “a close friend” of his.

The judge did ask for a pledge from the husband, who was in court, not to consummate the marriage until the girl reaches puberty, according to al-Jutaili.

The judge ruled that when the girl reaches puberty, she will have the right to request a divorce by filing a petition with the court, the lawyer said.

Christoph Wilcke, a Saudi Arabia researcher for Human Rights Watch, said his organization has heard many other cases of child marriages.

“We’ve been hearing about these types of cases once every four or five months because the Saudi public is now able to express this kind of anger, especially so when girls are traded off to older men,” Wilcke said.

Zuhair al-Harithi, a spokesman for the Human Rights Commission, a Saudi government-run human rights group, said his organization is fighting against child marriages.

“The Human Rights Commission opposes child marriages in Saudi Arabia,” al-Harithi said. “Child marriages violate international agreements that have been signed by Saudi Arabia and should not be allowed.”

The spokesman said he did not have specific details about this case but his organization has been able to stop at least one other child marriage.
 
a union apparently arranged by the girl’s father to settle his debts
YUSUFALI: It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee, except any thy right hand should possess (as handmaidens): and Allah doth watch over all things.

PICKTHAL: It is not allowed thee to take (other) women henceforth, nor that thou shouldst change them for other wives even though their beauty pleased thee, save those whom thy right hand possesseth. And Allah is ever Watcher over all things.

SHAKIR: It is not allowed to you to take women afterwards, nor that you should change them for other wives, though their beauty be pleasing to you, except what your right hand possesses and Allah is Watchful over all things. - Al-Ahzab 33:52

I would assume the judge based his decision on the verse above. I could be wrong though. 🤷 Perhaps the Muslims here know better.
 
:mad: I think the judge based his decision on this hadith:

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

صحيح البخاري - النكاح - إنكاح الرجل ولده الصغار:
حدثنا ‏ ‏محمد بن يوسف ‏ ‏حدثنا ‏ ‏سفيان ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏هشام ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏أبيه ‏ ‏عن ‏ ‏عائشة ‏ ‏رضي الله عنها ‏
أن النبي ‏ ‏صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏تزوجها وهي بنت ست سنين وأدخلت عليه وهي بنت تسع ومكثت عنده تسعا ‏


(E) (A)

And the judge decision is expected because:
Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?(Matthew 7:15-16).
 
Although paedophilia may likely be the cause, i still strongly believe Surah 33:52 would be a closer assumption since this case is about selling the daughter to settle debts. As the ‘rightful owner’, the man is ‘justified’ as in accordance to the teachings of the Qu’ran.
 
And the misery continue…:dts:
May YHWH be with her and her mother. :gopray:

April 12, 2009 update:

"*(CNN)-- A Saudi mother is expected to appeal a judge’s ruling after he once again refused to let her 8-year-old daughter divorce a 47-year-old man, a relative said.

Sheikh Habib Al-Habib made the ruling Saturday in the Saudi city of Onaiza. Late last year, he rejected a petition to annul the marriage.*"
 
Why do people constantly label atrosities like that as Religous? Were the burning of Witches not so long ago a Religous act?
 
In the name of Allah , Most Gracious, Most Merciful

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
A loving religion?

a union apparently arranged by the girl’s father to settle his debts – a lawyer in the case told CNN…
Where Allah allowed a dad to arrange marriage of his daugther to settle his debts ??? If a man gives loan to other person & he is unable to pay , Prophet’s advised is allow him more time & if possible to forgive him .

So , why this comment - A loving religion?
 
In the name of Allah , Most Gracious, Most Merciful

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
YUSUFALI: It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this,
That order was Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) only.

.
I would assume the judge based his decision on the verse above…
Strange. What’s the relationship between this verse & arrange marriage of daughter to get rid of loan ??? 🤷
 
God is no respecter of persons. He does not give one person special rules or privileges that others do not have.

Muhammad wasn’t getting his ‘revelations’ from God, but from his own earthly ego and desires and political needs.

Women were treated like property back then. Jesus set a higher example than Muhammad ever would or could, removing the misogyny from the life of woman, offending the sense of men who thought he was ‘crossing the line’ with them.

godswordtowomen.org/jesus.htm

That Muhammad only reinforced the low level view of women and called it ‘God’s’ own is more proof that his claims of being enlightened by God or an angle of God is just wishful thinking. If not for Muhammad, perhaps the women of Islam would not be married of as cattle, traded for debts, treated like lesser creatures, and bound by male patriarch and abuse that was never God’s will, but always men reading their own desires as Gods.
 
Why do people constantly label atrosities like that as Religous? Were the burning of Witches not so long ago a Religous act?
That was a long time ago, this is today. Does not make either one of them ok.

Are these not the same people who passed the laws allowing husbands to rape their wives every four days?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top