A Muslim is taking a landmark High Court case demanding that the Irish state recognise his polygamous marriage.
The man is from Lebanon, where polygamy is permitted. He is married to two women and has been granted Irish citizenship.
Seven years ago the Department of Justice refused to grant the man’s first wife a visa. The Lebanese entered Ireland with his second wife and claimed asylum. His first wife did not arrive until much later. The man has children with both women.
After its decision was challenged, the justice department agreed to quash its refusal to issue a visa to the first wife. But as part of this settlement the man is required to ask the High Court to rule on the validity of his marriage under section 29 of the 1995 Family Law Act.
The state and the wives are all represented in the case. The residency rights of both spouses will depend on the decision. A number of similar cases are awaiting the outcome.
Legal experts say section 29 applications are usually brought to determine if foreign divorces are valid in Ireland. Britain has agreed to recognise marriages in countries which allow polygamy, as long as a man has married just once.
Liam Egan, a member of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (Admin edit), accused Ireland of discriminating against Muslims in polygamous families. “It is draconian to treat this family differently,” said Egan.
“Ireland discriminates against Muslims seeking citizenship by asking them to sign an affidavit. The state should not be interfering in families like this. It is silent on adulterous affairs but the moment you try and do something honourable by bringing a woman into a marriage, even a polygamous marriage, there is an issue.”
In 2004 the justice department introduced a requirement that Muslims seeking naturalisation sign a form confirming they had only one wife and would not marry a second one.
The department said: “The Irish Supreme Court in 1989 determined that polygamous marriages and potentially polygamous marriages are not valid and not entitled to recognition in Irish law.
“There is a case involving an individual before the courts dealing with this particular issue and, as such, the department is not in a position to comment any further at this time.”
According to Egan, the Koran says that Muslims can marry up to four women but only if they can provide financial support and “love each of them equally”. He said there are polygamous marriages in Ireland “but it is rare enough because of the recession”.
The Immigrant Council of Ireland said the case highlighted the need for the government to address gaps in immigration legislation dealing with family reunification. It wants rules about who qualifies to live in Ireland as the family member of an Irish citizen or migrant.Source
MPAC.ie Comment: Ireland’s Catholic specific constitution has long been in need of an overhaul and this case provides just the opportunity. There is no legal or moral reason why this Muslim man or any other Muslim male cannot take on the responsibility of multiple wives. In a country that is about to recognise civil partnerships between sodomites, the government hasn’t a leg to stand on!
Related posts:
- Polygyny Case highlights Current Judicial Inadequacies
- Time for Irish Government to Respect Muslim Holidays
- The European Court of Human Rights is part of an aggressive and belligerent drive towards secularism
- Punishing Muslim for refusal to shake hands with women is discrimination
- How the US treats Muslim Prisoners
الأحد 23 صفر 1431 at 1:21 pm
It does have 1. It will give only give civil partnership to gays not marriage 2. The fundementals remain the same – One Asylum Seeker – One partner
الأحد 23 صفر 1431 at 2:11 pm
When he signed the affidavitt he agreed to the laws of this country, he did not have to sign it, he did not have to choose this country as his new home and he can go back to the Lebannon and support both of his wives there. Lebannon or any Islamic country would not change its law to suit newly arrived citizens, why should Ireland.
I don’t expect anything from Ireland, that my home country Saudi would not do for an Irish citizen.
الأحد 23 صفر 1431 at 2:23 pm
The problem with your reasoning ‘nidal’ is that Saudi Arabia makes no claim to be a liberal democratic state. As a prospective citizen of this state, our Lebanese brother is perfectly entitled to ask for a review of a law that actively discriminates against Muslims and we fully support him.
Regarding the affidavit – that which is admitted under duress is inadmissible in court. It’s a bit like psychological torture.
Garland, as sodomites are entitled to civil partnerships including all the legal rights etc, then there seems no reason why a second, third or fourth wife might not be recognized under the same arrangement, that might be an option.
الأحد 23 صفر 1431 at 7:23 pm
Mujaahid you hit the nail on the head, Ireland is a democracy and most irish people would never support polygamy. Therefore it is illegal.
I don’t remember signing the affidavit under duress or being tortured to do so – I hope he is sueing the irish government for this torture. I saw it as agreeing to the laws of this land and because Ireland is my adopted home was happy to do so.
No law in Ireland discriminates against Muslims. I am very happy living here and have made many friends and my children are very happy here. My wife is very happy here too – how does this lebanese guy propose to support his wife and all his children once they arrive. I hope he does not expect the state to provide two houses, check the rules of polygamy
‘nidal’
الأحد 23 صفر 1431 at 8:17 pm
Ireland makes claims to be a democracy ‘nidal’ when in reality it is a hypocrisy.
Did you sign an affidavit ‘nidal’? If a person is compelled to relinquish an aspect of his religion, then this is tantamount to psychological torture. It’s like forcing a Muslim woman who wears the Burka to remove it. She is forced to walk around in humiliation or remain at home.
So because you are happy you have concluded that no law discriminates against Muslims, now there’s a stretch. That’s an extremely introverted and if you don’t mind me saying, perverted outlook. If Islam meant anything to you, you’d know that no one truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself. There is active discrimination against Muslims in Ireland with regard to employment, education, religious worship, etc. Perhaps if you were to look beyond the joys of your immediate family you’d see that.
Your assumption that a Muslim would utilize state benefits to support a second wife speaks volumes. Please drop the pretense and say who you really are.
الأحد 23 صفر 1431 at 8:43 pm
I never said he would ask the state to provide benifits, I asked how he hoped to provide for his 2 wives,
الأحد 23 صفر 1431 at 9:51 pm
That’s something best asked of the brother rather than speculating, wouldn’t you agree Nidal?
I’m pleased your family has settled in, be careful though that your good fortune is not an occasion of stumbling for others. Our immigrant brethren have a lot to be grateful for, but one can be thankful without being the proverbial doormat. When there are injustices and discrimination it behooves us to speak the truth, even if it be against our own selves.
الاثنين 24 صفر 1431 at 12:54 am
Unlike you Egan I do not go around using pseudonyms, different personas, surrogates or cronies to spread my ideology (Politics.ie, Boards.ie) and I have the courage to clearly put my name to the statements I make.
I do not know who Nidal is nor have I any contact with him but believe me there are many many people of Saudi Arabian origin who would find your views disgusting and abhorrent.
If you allude one more time that I am being deceptive by using a different persona than back it up (I’m sure you record IP addresses) or shut up. Otherwise you are flirting with libel.
Mohammed AlKabour
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Egan, pardon will be given after you publish a retraction on the website. I can understand how by habitually behaving dishonestly as you do, you tend to assume others are doing the same.
You have banned me:
“Removed – we will not give oxygen to those who accept some of Allah’s book and reject the rest”
When that was posted my messages were automatically rejected without bothering to be moderated.
Your denial is another bare faced lie of which I have saved evidence that I will illustrate to the wider community your reprehensible tactics and demeanour. A Conduct unbecoming of any moral person never mind someone claiming to be a devout Muslim.
I will happily stand by that statement and the ones you listed in a court of law. Feel free to contact my solicitor*********************************
Egan cast out the dishonesty, thuggish behaviour and mafia like intimidation tactics that you have so amply displayed and only then expect others to enter into a genuine debate with you regarding the perverse Wahhabi cult you belong to .Till than debating with you is as useful as talking to a brick wall and I will confront you only where the wellbeing of the Irish Muslim community and wider society is at stake or as in this instance you make a false allegations against my person.
Have the courage to allow my posts to be published. One way or the other they will be, I assure you, and have the decency to sign your name in a letter.
الاثنين 24 صفر 1431 at 2:50 am
Thank you for that Mohammed, and I apologise for any erroneous implications.
Now would you kindly show how and where MPAC.ie or I have deviated from mainstream Islamic thought. The comments policy clearly states: Comments that make false or unsubstantiated allegations will not be published. You’ve been given substantial leeway, please furnish your evidence.
الاثنين 24 صفر 1431 at 10:05 am
Muhammad Al Kabour says, “Unlike you Egan I do not go around using pseudonyms, different personas, surrogates or cronies to spread my ideology.” Could you please tell us who ‘Friar Mo’ is? On the Boards.ie forum you post a thread that runs a whole three pages before you reveal your real name and that only after a poster called EireMuzzie made the connection. There are similar posts on Politics.ie. Unless you have changed your name by deed poll, then Friar Mo is indeed a pseudonym, is it not?
In fact I believe the comments on page 3 of the Thread on Boards.ie are quite revealing, I’ve posted them below for readers:
MPAC reserves the right to post or not post comments, that’s not being dishonest or deceptive, they have made that clear in their comments policy.
I don’t think MPAC should further engage in discourse with an individual such as Mr Al Kabour.
الاثنين 24 صفر 1431 at 10:40 am
Comment removed
[Admin Edit - Mr Al Ghamidi, you have asked this question before. Please do not ask again. If Mr Al Kabour chooses to not answer then that is his prerogative]
الاثنين 24 صفر 1431 at 11:06 am
Mohammed and Al Ghamidi – play the ball, not the person. Any further digs will result in a ban.
الثلاثاء 25 صفر 1431 at 1:33 am
I believe I have a right to respond to your personal attacks and allegations that have been published Al Ghamidi:
I have used the the same username FriarMo exclusively on Irish forums for 4 years including the politics.ie and boards.ie website. On the board.ie thread you alluded to, the first post I published has a link to the website http://www.antimpacie.wordpress.com where the unedited version is published with my name clearly signed, your allegation that I hid my name at the start is therefore patently false.
If you care to search my name and FriarMo you will come across numerous posts where I have signed my name to statements. Once I have established my identity I do not see the significance of repeating the process for each comment or reply. I have never been deceptive or dishonest about who I am, (Admin edit: please see comments policy. Please substantiate allegations made in this post and others. Any further breaches will result in a ban)
Mohammed AlKabour
الثلاثاء 25 صفر 1431 at 11:25 am
So Mr Al Kabour, Friar Mo is not a pseudonym because you ‘do not go around using pseudonyms’. OK…
I accept that once you ‘have established’ your ‘identity’ you ‘do not see the significance of repeating the process for each comment or reply’, except there was nothing to reasonably establish for first time visitors to the site the link between you (Muhammad Al Kabour) and the ‘non-pseudonym’ Friar Mo. A glance at the CP page of Friar Mo reveals no link or hint that it is you, and it is hardly reasonable to assume that an external link implies authorship.
I don’t believe anyone said you hid your name, don’t contrive grievances. Perhaps it was an oversight.
الثلاثاء 25 صفر 1431 at 8:44 pm
Mr AlKabour sounds like the type of muslim who is welcome in Ireland. He has chosen his faith for himself and realises its a personal issue not to be shoved down the throats of everyone else.
الثلاثاء 25 صفر 1431 at 9:40 pm
We be gud Mooslims masa’a Ross, we an our chillins….
You must be a glutton for punishment Ross, coming on here and all…that old Catholic masochism
الثلاثاء 25 صفر 1431 at 10:28 pm
No I’m not saying we want a subservient muslim – far from it. Just because he doesn’t follow your brand of wahhabist rubbish doesn’t mean he’s being subservient. He doesn’t believe what he believes because of us but because he is clearly an intelligent human being who knows that faith is a personal issue and NOBODY has a monopoly on the truth. We want a muslim who treats us as his equals so that we can return the favour. It’s far more palatable don’t you think?!
الثلاثاء 25 صفر 1431 at 11:33 pm
Ross says: No, I’m not saying we want a subservient Muslim’ But you are Ross, be honest. You want a palatable type of Muslim who knows his place and is grateful for the crumbs you occasionally throw his way. You don’t want to hear any Muslim speak of Islam, Jihad, the hudood, Shariah, etc. so naturally you elevate toward those who fit your vision of a ‘perfect Muslim’ and seek to impose that vision upon all Muslims with terms like ‘moderates’ etc.
Ross says: ‘NOBODY has a monopoly on the truth’ You’re not making sense now Ross (again), if you claim that nobody has a monopoly on the truth then you can’t very well castigate me or others, can you? Unless of course you think you have such a monopoly.
Ross says: ‘We want a muslim who treats us as his equals’ I have no idea what YOU mean by equal, but think it wholly disingenuous when it is the kuffar who have robbed Muslims of justice the world over. Those who say that Islam is the religion of equality are lying against Islam. Rather Islam is the religion of justice which means treating equally those who are equal and differentiating between those who are different.
الأربعاء 26 صفر 1431 at 12:27 am
Once again your reasoning amazes me. Tell me why I can’t castigate you if I don’t have a monopoly on the truth. Don’t forget I’m the one who admits to not having a monopoly on the truth, you on the other hand claim that you do.
As for a subservient muslim if you think subservient means integrated and not prejudiced or bigoted then that’s up to you but nobody else has to go by your definition. I treat somebody like AlKabour as my equal because he harbours no ill feeling towards me and he is a level headed live and let live kind of guy. (admin edit: please see comments policy)
الأربعاء 26 صفر 1431 at 1:16 am
Perhaps you should re-read my comments Ross.
Integrated into what? As you well know the term is often a euphemism for assimilation which assumes that one is assimilating toward something better. Are you suggesting that Irish culture (sic) is superior to Islam?
Who harbours ill feeling toward you Ross?
But you’re not a live and let live kind of guy at all, are you Ross?
الأربعاء 26 صفر 1431 at 2:02 am
I am, so long as the courtesy is extended back to me. I don’t tolerate intolerance if you will!!!
Really??? Assimilation means changing to something better???? That’s new to me.
You and your ilk harbour ill feelings towards atheists like me simply because I have chosen to use my brain.
Islam and Irish culture have their ups and downs. I would choose Irish culture because that is how I want to live my life. I would say it has more upsides to it than islam. Not really a question of which is superior or inferior. I would however say that islam is inferior to western culture because it discourages free thought – probably the basis of all problems with islam. That said I do not think I am superior to a muslim, so long as he can show he can use his brain.
الأربعاء 26 صفر 1431 at 2:30 am
I hold no ill feeling toward you Ross, only pity.
What do YOU mean when you say YOU don’t tolerate intolerance. Can you define what you mean by tolerance. I’m intolerant toward rape, abuse, pedophilia,injustice etc. are you saying you are not?
الأربعاء 26 صفر 1431 at 7:18 pm
Funnily enough I don’t believe that you harbour no ill-will towards me. I really do pity you and that’s coming from a reasoned point of view, not your twisted illogical mind (the reason you pity me in the first place).
The tolerance I am talking about is tolerating what other consenting adults do in their private lives or public lives, depending on the circumstances, so long as it does not affect other people. For example homosexuality, drinking, drug taking, how somebody chooses how to dress, the right to die etc. All the freedoms we enjoy in a liberal democracy. To be honest I’d even tolerate your polygamy. You can go on about how homosexuality in public offends you and whatever but at the end of the day it is you who lets yourself get offended by these things and it doesn’t affect your attempts at leading a good life (or what you think is a good life).
الأربعاء 26 صفر 1431 at 10:52 pm
I’m sorry you feel that way Ross, I can’t think why?
Ah, so you’re not as ‘tolerant’ as you make out, eh? You condition your ‘toleration’ based on the harm principle. If you are consistent with that, then you cannot seriously condone homosexuality as it is an abominable form of self and societal harm. Neither could you sanction drug or alcohol use. All of the aforementioned afflictions affect other people.
الخميس 27 صفر 1431 at 11:31 am
So you would allow drink and drug taking if it doesnt harm anyone else. And I do understand there are some people who can have one drink and there are some people who can ONLY have 10 pints and get absolutely smashed every single weekend, getting sick in taxis, fighting in the streets, hitting their wives or girlfriends and so on and so on. Also, there are the people who can smoke a joint and relax with friends, and then there are those who cannot stick with hash and so do coke, and then E and then end up on heroin and destroy their life, their families lives and their friends lives.
You say you use your brain no? So, using your brain, does it not make more sense to completely ban all of these substances to cut the risk of ANYONES life being in danger or at risk?
Islamicly a person can drink as much alcohol as they want and do as much drugs as they want, inside their own home and once it doesnt harm anyone else and basically doesnt go any further than that. Once it goes further than a quiet drink in a mans own sitting room, steps of punishment can be taken by the people affected or the ruling authority.
الخميس 27 صفر 1431 at 2:54 pm
I’ve never made myself out to be any more tolerant than I am. Unfortunately for you I don’t share your twisted beliefs so I don’t believe homosexuality is a form of self harm or societal harm. Please tell me where your evidence for this is outside your koran and hadith because don’t forget I don’t believe in what they say.
Drug and alcohol ABUSE is wrong as it harms other people. Taken in moderation I have no problem with people who do it and I do it myself as well.
الخميس 27 صفر 1431 at 9:01 pm
See there’s your problem with proportionality. No it doesn’t make sense to ban those substances because SOME people abuse them. No other adult has the right to make a decision for me based on what somebody else has done, particularly when the vast majority of people who drink do so responsibly.
Exactly how many people who smoke hash end up using heroin Whelan?? Shows how much you know about drugs when you lump ecstasy in with coke and then somehow end up with heroin. I’m sure there are plenty of heroin addicts in Afghanistan who didn’t start on drink or any other drugs.
Muslims don’t need drink to hit their wives do they Whelan?? (Admin edit – unsubstantiated claim. Please see Comments policy)
الخميس 27 صفر 1431 at 10:38 pm
You have just completely ignored the legitimacy of my statements. Are you saying ‘ah forget the minority, I want to have fun with my friends!!’ Is that not illegal here in the suppossed ‘civilized’ west.
What Im saying is Why should you people who can have one pint get to say whats right for the people who dont want to harm their families anymore because they cant drink without getting smashed!!
الجمعة 28 صفر 1431 at 12:19 am
Homosexuality is not self-harm?????????? ok – you asked. Let’s look at what doctors say about their behaviour:
“Male homosexual behaviour is not simply either ‘active’ or ‘passive,’ since penile-anal, mouth-penile, and hand-anal sexual contact is usual for both partners, and mouth-anal contact is not infrequent. . . . Mouth-anal contact is the reason for the relatively high incidence of diseases caused by bowel pathogens in male homosexuals. Trauma may encourage the entry of micro-organisms and thus lead to primary syphilitic lesions occurring in the anogenital area. . . . In addition to sodomy, trauma may be caused by foreign bodies, including stimulators of various kinds, penile adornments, and prostheses.”
If that doesn’t turn your stomach, then get a load of this:
Anal intercourse is the sine qua non of sex for many gay men.22 Yet human physiology makes it clear that the body was not designed to accommodate this activity. The rectum is significantly different from the vagina with regard to suitability for penetration by a penis. The vagina has natural lubricants and is supported by a network of muscles. It is composed of a mucus membrane with a multi-layer stratified squamous epithelium that allows it to endure friction without damage and to resist the immunological actions caused by semen and sperm. In comparison, the anus is a delicate mechanism of small muscles that comprise an “exit-only” passage. With repeated trauma, friction and stretching, the sphincter loses its tone and its ability to maintain a tight seal. Consequently, anal intercourse leads to leakage of fecal material that can easily become chronic.
The potential for injury is exacerbated by the fact that the intestine has only a single layer of cells separating it from highly vascular tissue, that is, blood. Therefore, any organisms that are introduced into the rectum have a much easier time establishing a foothold for infection than they would in a vagina. The single layer tissue cannot withstand the friction associated with penile penetration, resulting in traumas that expose both participants to blood, organisms in feces, and a mixing of bodily fluids.
Furthermore, ejaculate has components that are immunosuppressive. In the course of ordinary reproductive physiology, this allows the sperm to evade the immune defenses of the female. Rectal insemination of rabbits has shown that sperm impaired the immune defenses of the recipient.23 Semen may have a similar impact on humans.
The end result is that the fragility of the anus and rectum, along with the immunosuppressive effect of ejaculate, make anal-genital intercourse a most efficient manner of transmitting HIV and other infections. The list of diseases found with extraordinary frequency among male homosexual practitioners as a result of anal intercourse is alarming:
Anal Cancer
Chlamydia trachomatis
Cryptosporidium
Giardia lamblia
Herpes simplex virus
Human immunodeficiency virus
Human papilloma virus
Isospora belli
Microsporidia
Gonorrhea
Viral hepatitis types B & C
Syphilis
Sexual transmission of some of these diseases is so rare in the exclusively heterosexual population as to be virtually unknown. Others, while found among heterosexual and homosexual practitioners, are clearly predominated by those involved in homosexual activity. Syphilis, for example is found among heterosexual and homosexual practitioners. But in 1999, King County, Washington (Seattle), reported that 85 percent of syphilis cases were among self-identified homosexual practitioners. And as noted above, syphilis among homosexual men is now at epidemic levels in San Francisco.
A 1988 CDC survey identified 21 percent of all Hepatitis B cases as being homosexually transmitted while 18 percent were heterosexually transmitted.28 Since homosexuals comprise such a small percent of the population (only 1-3 percent), they have a significantly higher rate of infection than heterosexuals.
Anal intercourse also puts men at significant risk for anal cancer. Anal cancer is the result of infection with some subtypes of human papilloma virus (HPV), which are known viral carcinogens. Data as of 1989 showed the rates of anal cancer in male homosexual practitioners to be 10 times that of heterosexual males, and growing. Thus, the prevalence of anal cancer among gay men is of great concern. For those with AIDS, the rates are doubled.31
Other physical problems associated with anal intercourse are:
hemorrhoids
anal fissures
anorectal trauma
retained foreign bodies.
That’s about all I can stomach for the moment. If you are not convinced at this stage, then you can read more here: http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html#06
It’s a Catholic site, right up your street
الجمعة 28 صفر 1431 at 1:10 am
Don’t worry I’m well aware of what goes on Mujaahid. The thing is, they are consenting adults so it’s up to them so long as they aren’t masochistic about it.
Whelan I ignored the legitimacy of your statements because I don’t agree. I’m not going to be told what to do just because some idiot can’t control his drinking problem. Should we all be kept behind bars because some people kill others?? Some people overdose on paracetemol, should we all stop taking them because of that?? Many muslims blow themselves up because of their beliefs, should you stop practising islam because of that??? If we took extreme measures for everything none of us could live our lives – which is effectively what you want; an incredibly boring world with nothing to do but pray (Admin edit: unsubstantiated comment, please see Comments policy)
الجمعة 28 صفر 1431 at 3:26 am
So you don’t deny it’s a harm then, eh Ross? From a societal point of view it compromises the traditional family unit, it’s a burden on the taxpayer and it breaks down values (have you seen their Pride parades???).
It isn’t a private affair by any stretch of the imagination, as you well know.
Could you please define ‘consent’.
الجمعة 28 صفر 1431 at 1:23 pm
Consent isn’t a very difficult word to understand. It means agreeing to do something or allowing another to do something whilst fully informed of the consequences of such. Again these ‘values’ are a purely personal thing for yourself based on your religious beliefs so bringing them up in an argument does little for your cause.
If you looked at what I said originally I said as long as it doesn’t do harm to anybody ELSE, not to themselves – hence why I also included people’s right to die.
It doesn’t compromise the traditional family unit to any real degree. There will always be families and straight people and they will always outnumber homosexuals by a good margin. If people allow it to affect them then it is them with the issue, not homosexuals.
How is it a burden on the taxpayer?? Besides even if it were homosexuals pay tax like everybody else. Again there are plenty of things that are a burden on the taxpayer but are not outlawed.
السبت 29 صفر 1431 at 1:14 pm
Therein lies your problem, can anyone claim that they are fully aware of all the possible outcomes of any action? Do you think sexual consent is ever free? Or is it bound up in cultural/peer/social expectations? There are huge issues with the concept of consent Ross, for example sexual consent has no intrinsic value in itself except that which is given it, and that as I have stated is based on what is considered acceptable in society.
And I indicated that homosexuality does do harm to everyone else, society being the first victim.
Another glib response, do you think you choose to take offense or is it simply an instinctive emotional reaction to the subject? We don’t choose to be offended, angry, happy etc.
As the article I submitted for your consideration indicates, sexual disease is more prevalent among the homosexual community so it could be argued that their lifestyle choice places an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer. I would also add all the harmful lifestyle choices such as drinking, drug-taking etc to this category and argue that the taxpayer should not have to support these harmful choices AND that any harmful outcome should be the sole responsibility of those who made the choice in the first place.
السبت 29 صفر 1431 at 4:04 pm
So what you’re trying to say is that homosexuals have been coerced into having sex with each other because our culture puts pressure on them to do so. (Admin. edit: please see comments policy)
It’s not other people’s problem if you take offence from their behaviour. Why should other people change what they want to do just because you get offended. This is the typical self-centred muslim view of the world; that your sensibilities take precedence over the liberties of others.
So you’re saying because homosexuals are more likely to have an STI they shouldn’t be allowed to do what they want. How more likely do they have to be for you to draw the line and say ‘no, sorry you’re costing the taxpayer too much, stop what you’re at right now’?? I know you need to get told something countless times before you realise you’re wrong and then stop replying but I’ll say it again – there are plenty of things people do every day that cost money to the taxpayer yet these things are not outlawed.
السبت 29 صفر 1431 at 6:31 pm
There is considerable coercion Ross, and former sodomites will attest to it. But that wasn’t the point that was being made. We were discussing consent, and typically you veered off when you couldn’t answer.
Hardly just a Muslim sensibility, is it Ross. I take it incessant loud music from your neighbours house wouldn’t prompt you to act on the offense you feel? I think, like most of your arguments, you expect more of Muslims than you would even of yourself.
I’m saying the prevalence of disease among sodomites is one of many reasons why their lifestyle choice should not be acceptable. Society should not be burdened by their indulgences.
الأحد 01 ربيع الأول 1431 at 7:48 pm
(Admin edit: please see Comments policy)
Consent has a lot to do with coercion in case you didn’t know, and you were basically saying that consent wasn’t fully informed and that people were coerced into having homosexual relations. So no I didn’t veer off topic. I’m sure there is a bit of that going on but it also happens in heterosexual relationships as well. I also very much doubt it’s going on to any large degree.
First of all incessant music should not offend, it would annoy. Typical you though using words like offence and racism at every opportunity. Second of all it’s not as if you have homosexuals outside your house having anal s** and whatever else all day everyday. You can choose to ignore what they do. Change channel, turn off the radio, put down the magazine. Not that you do any of these things anyway – I’d say you live a dreadfully boring, sheltered life away from all the kufr, in which case you have no reason to complain about open homosexuality. At least homosexuals can take the p*** out of themselves. You muslims take yourselves waaaaaaaay to seriously.
Again I will ask just how much more prevalent does disease have to be among homosexuals before you tell them they’re not allowed? What other reasons then other than your 7th century text are there that homosexuality should be outlawed?
السبت 07 ربيع الأول 1431 at 7:05 am
Just wonder – if Islam is superior to Irish culture – how come Muslims prefer places created by non-Muslims? shouldn’t Islamic states be better? and Irish people seek to go to saudy arabia?
السبت 07 ربيع الأول 1431 at 8:31 am
Don’t reply..I’m gone.