Archive for the ‘marriage’ Tag

Saudi girl, 8, must stay married to 58-year old

An 8-year old Saudi Arabian girl forced into a marriage with a 58-year old man (CNN reports that he’s 47) must stay married, according to a Saudi Judge, Sheikh Habib Abdallah al-Habib.  Her father arranged the marriage in order to cover his debts to the man, who is reportedly “a close friend.”  The amount in question is approximately $7961 US.

The Saudi flag

The Saudi flag

The girl’s mother, with whom she lives, petitioned the court to annul the marriage; however the judge ruled that the mother, who is divorced from the father, is not the legal guardian of the girl and thus has no standing to bring suit.  The judge ruled that the girl could petition in her own right for a divorce once she reaches puberty, however there is no accepted definition of what constitutes puberty under sharia law.  The father apparently had asked the man not to have sex with his “wife” until she reached 18.  The judge has asked for some sort of pledge from the husband against consummating the marriage until she reaches puberty, whatever that may mean. (I presume that the pledge would go to the father, not the girl, if te girl is statutorily raped, as such activity would be called in the civilized world).

Such marriages between young girls and (much) older men are not terribly uncommon in Saudi Arabia, though there are Saudis who oppose child marriages and point out that they violate various human rights agreements to which the kingdom is a party.  (As I’d previously noted, women are not currently allowed to drive legally in the kingdom, which is hardly a bastion of women’s rights.)

Apparently the girl doesn’t yet know that she’s married.  Hopefully the girl continues living with her mother and doesn’t find out about her marriage until she gets to sign the divorce papers in a few years.

Advertisements

California’s Proposition 8

Flag of California

Flag of California

Actor and philanthropist Brad Pitt has donated $100,000 to fight Proposition 8, which California citizens will be voting on this November. The measure is the result of In re Marriage Cases, a case decided by the 4-3 California Supreme Court in May that held “that the California legislative and initiative measures limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violate the state constitutional rights of same-sex couples and may not be used to preclude same-sex couples from marrying.” (Text of the decision, PDF) The decision struck down Proposition 22, passed in 2000 with 61.4% of voters in favor, which prohibited same-sex marriage by statute.

The summary of the measure, prepared by the Secretary of State and provided to the people in their voter information guides, reads as follows:

ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California. Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Fiscal Impact: Over next few years, potential revenue loss, mainly sales taxes, totaling in the several tens of millions of dollars, to state and local governments. In the long run, likely little fiscal impact on state and local governments.

Initially, polls showed a small majority of Californians supported the measure. Polls taken since May, however, have shown a majority opposed to it. One recent poll shows 54% opposed and 40% in favor of the measure; however only 47% personally favor allowing same-sex couples to marry, the same percentage as are personally opposed. The survey found that 80% of respondents believe the outcome of the vote is “important.”

Much of the measure’s support comes from socially conservative religious groups, like James Dobson’s Focus on the Family and the Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints (the Mormons). However, all six Episcopal Bishops whose sees are in the state signed a letter opposing the ballot measure. The statement says in part:

As Episcopal Bishops of California, we are moved to urge voters to vote “No” on Proposition Eight. Jesus calls us to love rather than hate, to give rather than to receive, to live into hope rather than fear. . . . We believe that continued access to civil marriage for all, regardless of sexual orientation, is consistent with the best principles of our constitutional rights. We believe that this continued access promotes Jesus’ ethic of love, giving, and hope. (full text of letter in pdf)

The poll numbers have been steady for several months, so I would predict the measure will fail approximately 55-45%. If I were a Californian, I would certainly vote against Proposition 8. Bronze age purity codes should not to be enshrined in current constitutional law–if they should be, everyone is in trouble. This will be an interesting one to watch on election night.