• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Aisha vs. Mary

Agnapostate

Banned
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
912
Location
Between Hollywood and Compton.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
What is the basis for inordinate focus on the Islamic prophet Mohammed's betrothal and consummation of his relationship with the girl Aisha while there is no parallel focus on the betrothal and marriage of Mary to Joseph despite the statement in the book of Matthew that Joseph "knew" Mary after the birth of Jesus, which would have occurred in her early teens if traditional customs were being adhered to? While I understand the basis for claims that sexual interactions between older men and young adolescents are less unethical than sexual interactions between older men and (presumably, possibly not) prepubescent girls, I'm certain that there would still be a conclusion that such conduct was still somewhat unethical nonetheless.

There seems to be an attempt to describe child marriage as a practice uniquely supported by Islamic doctrines, which accounts for its nature as a staple of authoritarian marriage arrangements in fundamentalist Islamic society today...despite the fact that there are also regional customs associated with the nature of such marriage arrangements entirely detached from Islam. It should not be forgotten that marriage and sexual relations between older men and young adolescent females was a staple of colonial U.S. history also, and is really only a recently abolished practice. Despite this, there is almost no consideration of the fact that the parents (or mother and "stepfather") of the central figure of the Christian religion seem to have been in an arrangement that would be today described as a "child marriage."

I've never condoned the nature of marriage in any fundamentalist religious society; I'm merely pointing out the inconsistency of those who would condemn that practice (usually as a wider element of expressing absurd geopolitical views regarding Islam), while ignoring the fact that Mary was likely a young teenager at the time of her wedding to Joseph (and younger still at the time of betrothal), while Joseph was likely significantly older and probably also old enough to be her father, as he is not mentioned in the later life of Jesus, indicating that his death occurred some time between Jesus's activity in Jerusalem at the age of 12 and the beginning of his ministry at age 30.

Perhaps we can connect a greater amount of religious influence on a society's public mores with a greater willingness to tolerate authoritarian social arrangements such as coerced marriage, especially the openly hierarchical monotheisms of Christianity and Islam...rather than any specific doctrines or tenets of the latter religion itself?
 

For me, the issue is that the Prophet Mohammed's practices are mirrored in MODERN Islamic law, such as the laws in Saudi Arabia where there is NO LEGAL LIMIT on the age at which a girl can be married.

Saudi court tells girl aged EIGHT she cannot divorce husband who is 50 years her senior | Mail Online

The same holds true in other Islamic countries such as Yemen and Qatar.
 

Um, I mentioned that. I asked if there was any relations to specific Islamic doctrines so much as the influence of monotheism and patterns associated with it in general. Since there are no countries in which Christianity is as influential as Islam (though some authoritarian Catholic countries like El Salvador approximate this to a lesser extent), there's not really any way of knowing that.
 

Most "Christian" countries have an age of consent.
 
Most "Christian" countries have an age of consent.

Well, when Christianity was as much of a force in those countries as Islam is in "Muslim" countries now, they had rather low ages of consent that would be considered unthinkable today. So whether it's a common trait of authoritarian monotheism or connected to regional and contextual settings detached from explicitly religious ones, Islamic theological doctrine isn't the sole suspect there.
 
You are on the right track in the sense that very high authoritarianism is the pertinent factor far more than either Islam or Christianity in themselves. However, whether a low (or no) "age of consent" indicates such authoritarianism depends on other variables.

The low (or absent) "ages of consent" of the type you are talking about (e.g., 9 in Yemen) relate to the consummation of marriage, with the marriages tending to be arranged by the family. The daughters of the family are under direct control of the patriarchs, without any pretense otherwise. Thus this type of "AoC" is not really about consent, it is more like a "ready to sell by" date. In these countries, sex outside of marriage (at least without permission of a patriarch) is illegal for girls and women.

However, a low (or lack of a fixed) age of consent for consensual sexual activity in general is very different. In Spain, the age of consent is 13, and most of the support for raising it comes from the right. Support for lowering or eliminating AoCs is a radical plank found on the secular libertarian left, as part of anti-ageist support for youth liberation and overall sexual freedom. An example of a supporter for liberalized AoCs in the US is the very liberal Judith Levine, author of Harmful to Minors.
 
Last edited:
Who ****ing cares...
 
Last edited:
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…