[roberto]

Originally Posted by Hanbali

Skinwalker is a Christian. I responded to his post.

And I will soon be getting under skinwalker's skin.

These Christian hypocrites attack our Noble Prophet [s] when they themselves haven't read their own Bible, which is full of Christian Prophets doing horrible things like having sex with their own daughters, murdering people in cold blood, having mad sex with concubines, and other such stuff. I will be responding like for like now. Fire with fire. The stupidity of the Christian hypocrites ticks me off.

The rule is the start of menstruation as long as it is not under age 9. That is how I recall it.

I don't care what various religions might, or might not say it's disgusting.

[Jaysh]

I just want to state that I made an error in this thread. The minimum age of marriage has nothing to do with menstruation or the age of 9. These were weak opinions I cited. I will be citing the majority opinion shortly. Insha-Allah.

[Jaysh]

Originally Posted by Skinwalker

In Yemen, the age of marriage is 15, so what happened to this girl is an atrocity.

What's wrong with a girl getting married at 15?

[Jaysh]

Originally Posted by Skinwalker

I'm Native American and worship the Great Spirit.

Age of Marriage amongst Native Americans

The practice of marrying girls at a young age was prevalent amongst Native American populations as well, as we read in an article entitled “Living Arrangements Among Native American Elders”:

Marriage was considered essential among all Navajos with polygamy, divorce, levirate and sorarate being practiced. Marriages were traditionally not based on romance but were arranged with the girls being married soon after puberty.

(Living Arrangements Among Native American Elders, http://www.pop.psu.edu/general/pubs/...pri/wp9605.pdf.)

We read further:

A Delaware Native American girl who reached puberty may have had her [marriage] union prearranged by her parents.

(WeddingDetails.com, Native American Traditions - WeddingDetails.com)

The first menstrual cycle was seen by the Native Americans as the coming of age, and after a ceremony, the young girl was ready for marriage:

This following are accounts for the coming of age rituals of first young women followed by that of the young men. The first occurred when the girl had her first menstrual cycle… When this celebration [i.e. the coming of age] was complete, joy of being accepted as a woman remained with the young girl as well as five vertical red and black stripes painted onto her cheek. These strips would be eventually removed and when the last of them was gone the young girl would be ready for marriage.

(Native Americans, Native American)

The Aztecs married their daughters off “well before the age of puberty”:

“Most [Aztec] girls were married (cohabiting) well before the age of puberty” (McCaa, 2003)[3]. Girls among the ancient Aztec (Nahua) married before age 15, and in many cases before 12 (McCaa, 1997; cf. 1996, 1994)[4]: “Children became adults upon marriage, and most children above the age of 10 years were married (or widowed, separated or abandoned)”. Females married very young, according to the narrative evidence from the Book of Tributes (Cline, 1993:p31-2)[5]. Quantitative analysis of these data places the average for females below the age of thirteen

(Growing Up Sexually: A World Atlas, Ref)

The various South American tribes practiced early marriage, and this practice continued well into the 1500s. It is sometimes referred to as a “rearing marriage”, i.e. the husband raises his wife from childhood. We read:

Sumner (1906:p382) [29] cited reports that of child marriage where “girls of ten are mothers”[30]. Child betrothal is reported among the Guaraní of the Paraná River. “In some cases little girls were given to grown men, who lived with their child wives, probably in the house of their future parents-in-law” (Métraux, 1948)[31]. Child betrothal is also reported among the Cainguá, but the girls were said to remain with their parents, who receive presents from their prospective sons-in-law (ibid.)…

For the Samaraka, “[i]n the past, girls were formally betrothed (kiiá) well before puberty, and “betrothal in the womb” was an accepted practice, while today mean age at betrothal is only a year or two below age at marriage and child betrothal is unknown” (Price, 1975)[33]. Among the Warao, “[t]here were boys who were betrothed to little girls who had not yet reached puberty” (Heinen, [1988])[34]. Among the Brazilian Yanomamo, “[p]arents may also betroth their children while they are still infants” (Early & Peters, 1990)[35]. Among the Cuna, the premarital four-day debut ceremony is even sometimes given before puberty in the parents’ zeal to insure their daughter’s having it (Stout, 1947:p34). As for the Asang, “[a] girl at a very early age, between eight and nine, is betrothed to a young man, who at once takes up residence in the house of her parents, whom he assists until […] [she] is old enough to be married, when, without ceremony, they are recognized as man and wife (Pim and Seeman, 1869:p306-7)[36]…

The Aikaná practiced betrothal in childhood, marriage took place after menarche (Becker-Donner, ?:p280)[38]. The same was formerly so in the Makurap (p290). The Bororo practised rearing marriage (Levak, 1973:p77-8)[39].

(Growing Up Sexually: A World Atlas, Ref)

[Jamroll]

Originally Posted by Jaysh

What's wrong with a girl getting married at 15?

I think he's saying that since the minimum legal age of marriage in Yemen is 15, then what happened to this girl is an atrocity, since she is only 8, almost half the Yemeni legal age.

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by Skinwalker

Look. You may want to debate what modernity means but I do not. That wasn't the intent of my statement. Modern in the sense I was using it means current day, as in time, eg. within our lifetime? eg. contemporary? Recently? Does that make it clearer?

My point is that you're using a subjective Eurocentric conception of sexual relations which isn't universally accepted. So you claim to be Native American, but you're thinking is entirely European or Western.

You haven't given a significant reason for following "contemporary" or "modern" conceptions of morality other then the argument that "everyone else is doing it," which is hardly a standard of ethics. If everyone thought genocide was acceptable, does that mean it creates moral obligations upon other cultures?

[nooni]

Originally Posted by Jaysh

What's wrong with a girl getting married at 15?

what jammers said...

Originally Posted by Jamroll

I think he's saying that since the minimum legal age of marriage in Yemen is 15, then what happened to this girl is an atrocity, since she is only 8, almost half the Yemeni legal age.

[TrentReznor858]

People also worshipped stones and buried their daughters in the sands for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Just because it was a widespread practice doesnt make it acceptable. Also, peoples life expectancy was alot shorter back then.

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by TrentReznor858

People also worshipped stones and buried their daughters in the sands for hundreds, if not thousands of years. Just because it was a widespread practice doesnt make it acceptable. Also, peoples life expectancy was alot shorter back then.

So then what makes something morally acceptable?

[Variable]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

My point is that you're using a subjective Eurocentric conception of sexual relations which isn't universally accepted. So you claim to be Native American, but you're thinking is entirely European or Western.

You haven't given a significant reason for following "contemporary" or "modern" conceptions of morality other then the argument that "everyone else is doing it," which is hardly a standard of ethics. If everyone thought genocide was acceptable, does that mean it creates moral obligations upon other cultures?

What I got from his post was a statement that just because it happened before doesn't mean it has any bearing on what's happening right now on the ground.

I don't think there was any statement there over the realativity or absolutism in the relationship between morality and modernity.

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by Variable

What I got from his post was a statement that just because it happened before doesn't mean it has any bearing on what's happening right now on the ground.

I don't think there was any statement there over the realativity or absolutism in the relationship between morality and modernity.

Right. Thats his argument. My point was that merely because something doesn't conform to contemporary moral norms doesn't make it immoral without getting into a discussion of why consensus plays a role in ethical theory.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

Right. Thats his argument. My point was that merely because something doesn't conform to contemporary moral norms doesn't make it immoral without getting into a discussion of why consensus plays a role in ethical theory.

I don't how discussing the point of consensus enters into the equation.

There isn't one on the issue of age of consent. Some people think one number is right, others think another is. Skinwalker was simply declaring his view on it, in opposition to another.

[jinnzaman]

Originally Posted by Variable

I don't how discussing the point of consensus enters into the equation.

There isn't one on the issue of age of consent. Some people think one number is right, others think another is. Skinwalker was simply declaring his view on it, in opposition to another.

And his opinion has no value.

[Variable]

Originally Posted by jinnzaman

And his opinion has no value.

It has as much value as anyone's on the matter.

[jinnzaman]