Polygamy and sharia

Mitt Romney made news recently for his family having historical ties to the practice of polygamy. Described by liberal pundits as “the ultimate Mormon oddity”, the truth is that the Mormon church officially repudiated polygamy in 1890. It was, in fact, a requirement for the admission of Utah to the Union.

Polygamy is an affront to the principle of equality between the sexes. You would think that this would be an issue that is championed as a women’s issue. Sadly, it gets little attention from international organizations, even on International Women’s Day.

The practice is common in the Muslim world, and is becoming common practice in Europe, as well:

“the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten reported statements from Norway’s Directorate of Immigration (UDI) that there are an increasing number of men with multiple wives in Norway. “The reason is married men travel to countries where polygamy is legal and then add a wife.” Though polygamy is illegal in Norway, “this is something that Norwegian authorities cannot prevent,” said UDI spokesman Karl Erik Sjøholt. …The Islamic Cultural Center Norway (ICCN), an immigrant organisation subsidised by the Norwegian state, advises Muslims in Norway to take several wives because polygamy “is advantageous and ought to be practiced where conditions lend themselves to such practice.”

Yesterday, LGF pointed to a reprint of an article at The American Muslim that encouraged the development of sharia law in America by using the model of Tribal Courts, as practiced by American Indians.

I recommend that as a first step, supporting organizations dealing with Islamic family law be established immediately. A professional association of Muslims in the law field (of whatever specialty) is a must. A law school students’ support group should be formed, and Muslim youth should be encouraged to enter this field. A second step would be to establish institutes in the U.S. which can supplement legal education with courses in Islamic family law. At the same time, pressure should be put on law schools to include courses in Shariah taught by Muslims.

This is not assimilation. This is not acceptance of American Civil Law. This is unacceptable. Inasmuch as the political left has resisted the logical step of protecting the institution of marriage through the amendment process, is there any other remedy that has legal and historical precedent? There is. And it goes back to that “ultimate Mormon oddity.” Joshua Trevino at Brussels Journal laid out the case in an excellent post from last year.

The precedent is the 1887 Edmunds-Tucker Act, which effectively disestablished the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints until that entity gave up its doctrine of polygamy. The Mormons were effectively declared an organized-crime outfit: their properties were confiscated, and their leaders were driven underground. It took three years, but in 1890 they abandoned polygamy, Utah became a state, and the Mormons … have been good, patriotic, and peaceful Americans ever since. One, Mitt Romney, even has a shot at being President shortly. They were forced to join the civilized world by the United States government, which cared more for the norms of American culture than the values of the Mormon faith – and rightly so. Looking back, it is difficult to deny that this vigorous action – in which no American was killed, deported, put into camps, or hunted down – was to the ultimate benefit of the country and the Mormons.

If we could act with that degree of sanity, self-preservation, and humanity in 1887-1890, why not now? If we cannot, it is not because Muslims now – or any other immigrant community now – are worse than Mormons then: it is because we have lost the self-confidence to do it.

see also — Suicide of the West and women’s rights,

Blue Star Chronicles, Planck’s Constant,Woman honor thyself

John Edwards: The “First Woman President?”

I had a pretty long mid-day drive today, and I tuned in The Rush Limbaugh Show to help the miles pass.  He mentioned an article in today’s NY Sun by Josh Gerstein.  John Edwards, First Woman President?  It was a hoot.  Enjoy.

Here is an excerpt:

BERKELEY, Calif.Toni Morrison famously dubbed President Clinton America’s “first black president.” With that barrier broken, the comments of a prominent feminist are provoking debate about who may lay a similar claim to the title of America’s first woman president.

mylilpony2.jpgThe candidate being touted as a torchbearer for women is not Senator Clinton, but one of her former colleagues, John Edwards. At a rally near the University of California, Berkeley campus this week, a veteran of the abortion-rights movement, Kate Michelman, asked and answered the question she gets most frequently about her decision to back the male former senator from North Carolina.

“Why John Edwards, given the historic nature of our extraordinary campaign for the presidency this year with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and all the others?” Ms. Michelman asked as she warmed up the crowd for Mr. Edwards. “I’ve gotten to know a lot of political leaders over the years that I’ve been an advocate for women’s rights. I know the difference between those who advocate as a political position and those who understand the reality of women’s lives.”

Compared to Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Edwards is short an ‘X’ chromosome, but listening to Ms. Michelman, that is easy to forget. “As a lawyer, as a senator, as a husband, as a father of two daughters, he understands the reality of women’s lives. He understands the centrality of women’s lives and experience to the health and well-being of society as a whole. … He understands that on an extremely personal level,” she said.

Her comments drew some quizzical looks, though if she had extended her argument to suggest that Mr. Edwards understood the plight of African Americans as well or better than Mr. Obama, some audible dissension would surely have arisen.

Hehehehe

(photocredit:  BileSnarkSneer)

Thursday Open

bluestraveler.jpgSPOKANE, Wash. — Blues Traveler singer and harmonica player John Popper was arrested after the vehicle he was riding in was clocked going 111 mph, the Washington State Patrol said Wednesday.

Inside the black Mercedes SUV, officers found a cache of weapons and a small amount of marijuana, the Patrol said. A police dog searched the vehicle, finding numerous hidden compartments containing four rifles, nine handguns and a switchblade knife. Authorities also found a Taser and night vision goggles. The vehicle was seized.

Popper, who lives in Snohomish, Wash., is the owner of the vehicle, which was being driven by Brian Gourgeois, 34, of Austin, Texas, said state patrol Trooper Jeff Sevigney. The vehicle also had flashing emergency headlights, a siren and a public address system, the Patrol said.

“Popper indicated to troopers that he had installed these items in his vehicle because (in the event of a natural disaster) he didn’t want to be left behind,” the Patrol said in a news release. He also told officers he collected weapons, the Patrol said.    (source)

=======================================================================================

This is the world famous Thursday Open Thread. Feel free to post your links, comments, trackbacks, or whatever (within reason).

TIME NEVER DIES

Sercan Ondem

The Light

Inspire, Encourage and Empower

resultizedotcom.wordpress.com/

All about career, personal development, productivity & leadership

TIME NEVER DIES

Sercan Ondem

The Reset Blog

Start over, just don't stop

raulconde001

A topnotch WordPress.com site

My life as Atu's Blog

a small thougt for a big planet of daydreamer

Taffy Toffy's Blog

太妃糖的博客

tekehdddddddddddddddddddddddddddd.wordpress.com/

About life, the universe and everything

Drowning in depression.

Is'nt it great being a human!

%d bloggers like this: