Arranged marriage is barbaric

[darkmage099]

I still can't believe people are still pulling the 'it's THEIR culture' card.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who gives a flying [bleep]? We're here to discuss anything, there shouldn't be a taboo about it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

According to YOU/ YOUR culture it is wrong, but obviously they don't so I do not see how you have a problem.

[warri0r45]

I still can't believe people are still pulling the 'it's THEIR culture' card.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who gives a flying [bleep]? We're here to discuss anything, there shouldn't be a taboo about it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's kind of ignorant. Sure we might think it's wrong, but obviously the parents in these cultures don't, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.

[darkmage099]

 

I still can't believe people are still pulling the 'it's THEIR culture' card.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who gives a flying [bleep]? We're here to discuss anything, there shouldn't be a taboo about it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's kind of ignorant. Sure we might think it's wrong, but obviously the parents in these cultures don't, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haha, Shadow claims they are brainwashed.

[Faux]

According to YOU/ YOUR culture it is wrong, but obviously they don't so I do not see how you have a problem.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My culture not have anything against arranged marriage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My culture doesn't preach 'oh [cabbage], arranged marriage is wrong.' I developed this viewpoint on my own. Anyone who's not brainwashed into thinking so can clearly see the lack of freedom. Freedom is not something contained in one culture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

edit: grammar

[Striker6]

Freedom? Freedom is a point of view, one that you are looking at from a very one sided position.

[Faux]

Freedom? Freedom is a point of view, one that you are looking at from a very one sided position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Freedom is a point of view"

[BlueLancer]

Freedom? Freedom is a point of view, one that you are looking at from a very one sided position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I must disagree there. One persons oppression can barely be an other person's liberty. Nobody would feel "free" being a slave just because it's 'culture' no matter what their point of view is. Freedom is not really a matter of 'view'. Even many citizens of North Korea realize they're not even nearly free, they just have no means to voice it.

[warri0r45]

 

Freedom? Freedom is a point of view, one that you are looking at from a very one sided position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I must disagree there. One persons oppression can barely be an other person's liberty. Nobody would feel "free" being a slave just because it's 'culture' no matter what their point of view is. Freedom is not really a matter of 'view'. Even many citizens of North Korea realize they're not even nearly free, they just have no means to voice it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While I agree with you mostly, I'd like to draw your attention to tyrants with a cult of personality. The people of the country (some of them, not all) are so brainwashed by the charm and charisma of the tyrant that they basically worship them.

[zach312]

Like in Japan, they used to tie little girls feet together while folded in half so they would have tiny feet, does that make it right because it is there culture? Hell no

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That was China, good job =D>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Topic: You guys that are saying arranged marriage is wrong....who the hell do you think you are to criticize other peoples' cultures and practices? I'm sure some people think marriage by choice is wrong. This can be applied to anything...such as inheritance, interracial/inter-religious marriage, and many other things. Let people live their lives as they will, you have no right to try and change someone else unless they're causing actual harm to others; and apparently arranged marriages aren't causing too much harm, so just leave it alone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

culture has no meaning when it comes to right and wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who are you to declare what's right and what's wrong? Islamic extremists think that what they do is right, in trying to spread Islam to the world. And everyone else thinks it's right to try and stop them. See what I mean? This is a world where reality and truth, right and wrong, are never truly concrete because of the rectification of views about what is considered to be real and true or right and wrong.

[yomom1919]

Wow, this debate should have ended along time ago... I dont understand how people cant see that, even though arranged marriages are part of tradition or culture, it doesn't lessen its violation of natural rights (natural rights, as developed countries have come to know, lets not start debating what is naturally right, go read Locke if you need some convincing :roll:).

[bonzeben23]

depends on where your from i'm arabic and my parents in their old countries arranged marraige was like always there

[BlueTear]

My culture doesn't preach 'oh [cabbage], arranged marriage is wrong.' I developed this viewpoint on my own. Anyone who's not brainwashed into thinking so can clearly see the lack of freedom. Freedom is not something contained in one culture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Solely to play devil's advocate:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does laws along the lines of age limits on drinking, prohibitation of certain substances and the legal concept of statuatory rape limit freedom in a way that is detrimental? Does a parents legal gaurdianship of someone underage impede their freedom in a way that is harmful?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In other words; Is the loss of this freedom of deciding who to marry without exception a bad thing?

[Faux]

Solely to play devil's advocate:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does laws along the lines of age limits on drinking, prohibitation of certain substances and the legal concept of statuatory [assault] limit freedom in a way that is detrimental? Does a parents legal gaurdianship of someone underage impede their freedom in a way that is harmful?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In other words; Is the loss of this freedom of deciding who to marry without exception a bad thing?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, because unlike the age limits you gave examples of, marriage (especially in cultures that employ arranged marriages) is permanent. In terms of assault laws, that falls under hurting another person (though there are laws for self-defense). Prohibition of substances are too broad as some are banned for their actual risk, and some are banned due to political and social reasons.

[BlueTear]

Yes, because unlike the age limits you gave examples of, marriage (especially in cultures that employ arranged marriages) is permanent. In terms of assault laws, that falls under hurting another person (though there are laws for self-defense).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meh, it censors the word I wanted use. Assuming I know my crime-TV it's the american legal term for having sex with a minor, which depending on where you live and how old you are, means it is strictly illegal for you to consent to sex of someone of a certain age. I wasn't refering to assault, but rather the free choice who to have intercourse with. So as long as limitations on freedom are limited in time, they're okay? So what decides which time limitations are acceptable then, and which ones are "barbaric"?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As a purely theoretical example; Would arranged marriages with a "divorce option" coming into play after, say, three years be barbaric as well?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prohibition of substances are too broad as some are banned for their actual risk, and some are banned due to political and social reasons.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which is just a fancy way to say that there is no logical reason why alcohol is legal when marijuana isn't. It's a little bit of freedom of choice taken away because someone decades ago had a burst of moral outrage. And today, it persists only due to... cultural traditations? Barbaric, that.

[____]

Banned substances fall under social morality (which is a joke) :uhh:

[Faux]

Meh, it censors the word I wanted use. Assuming I know my crime-TV it's the american legal term for having sex with a minor, which depending on where you live and how old you are, means it is strictly illegal for you to consent to sex of someone of a certain age. I wasn't refering to assault, but rather the free choice who to have intercourse with. So as long as limitations on freedom are limited in time, they're okay? So what decides which time limitations are acceptable then, and which ones are "barbaric"?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As a purely theoretical example; Would arranged marriages with a "divorce option" coming into play after, say, three years be barbaric as well?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which is just a fancy way to say that there is no logical reason why alcohol is legal when marijuana isn't. It's a little bit of freedom of choice taken away because someone decades ago had a burst of moral outrage. And today, it persists only due to... cultural traditations? Barbaric, that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By going into the 'age limits' then we'll have to consider how teenagers bodies are still changing and the brain doesn't fully develop until you reach a certain age. Kids do need guidelines when growing up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If marijuana (though here in Canada, the law against it is often unenforced) was to be legalized, then from there on, where will the line be drawn? Would heroin, cocaine, LSD, etc. be legalized as well?

[timmay929]

Arranged marriage is the devil.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Did momma say that? Lol.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, as for arranged marriage, if it is part of their culture, I don't have a problem with it. But if someone is forced against their will, then that isn't right.

[Faux]

I thought this was interesting...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One in four Saudi marriages end in divorce

 

 

 

(Reuters)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23 December 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia - Nearly one in four marriages in the conservative Muslim kingdom of Saudi Arabia ends in divorce, a newspaper quoted the Justice Ministry as saying on Saturday.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For 105,066 marriage contracts registered in 2005, 24,000 divorce cases were recorded by the ministry, Asharq Al Awsat newspaper said, quoting a ministry report. Officials at the Justice Ministry could not be reached for comment but the statistics come amid intense debate over the surge in divorce rates in the birthplace of Islam.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The High Court in the Red Sea port of Jeddah said earlier this year divorce rates in the city had risen by 60 percent over the last two years against 39 percent in the capital Riyadh and 18 percent in the Eastern Province, home to a Shia minority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Saudi Arabia, which follows an austere form of Sunni Islam, allows men to repudiate their wives.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâIt is impossible to have healthy relationships in Saudi Arabia. The laws have given men full authority while women are deprived of their rights and freedom,ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ rights activist Wajiha Al Howeidar told Reuters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While a few women have grown up in relatively liberal homes and refrain from marriage at an early age, many see in marriage a way out of protective parental homes, Al Howeidar said.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâThey end up in arranged marriages where there are no affinities and no romance,ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ she said.

[wakka102]

 

Agreed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To hell with "tradition" of some cultures; I'd disown my family if they tried it on me.

 

 

 

they'd kill you.

The would not kill you :roll: . This is very large within the muslim community. It's also, unfortunately, how the relationship with my previous gf ended (she is muslim). I do not agree with the idea but for them to say no it would disgrace their family. If you grew up with the idea it would not be that unusual because people are influenced by what is around them. If you do not grow up with arranged marriages around you then the culture would seem odd to you, and in the same way, our culture may seem odd to them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have a bit of a hatred for the idea since it drew the person I cared for away from me.

[Doughnut]

 

 

Agreed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To hell with "tradition" of some cultures; I'd disown my family if they tried it on me.

 

 

 

they'd kill you.

The would not kill you :roll: . This is very large within the muslim community. It's also, unfortunately, how the relationship with my previous gf ended (she is muslim). I do not agree with the idea but for them to say no it would disgrace their family. If you grew up with the idea it would not be that unusual because people are influenced by what is around them. If you do not grow up with arranged marriages around you then the culture would seem odd to you, and in the same way, our culture may seem odd to them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have a bit of a hatred for the idea since it drew the person I cared for away from me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kind of off topic, but that sucks mate. :cry:

[lawrencekill]

I thought this was interesting...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One in four Saudi marriages end in divorce

 

 

 

(Reuters)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

23 December 2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia - Nearly one in four marriages in the conservative Muslim kingdom of Saudi Arabia ends in divorce, a newspaper quoted the Justice Ministry as saying on Saturday.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

For 105,066 marriage contracts registered in 2005, 24,000 divorce cases were recorded by the ministry, Asharq Al Awsat newspaper said, quoting a ministry report. Officials at the Justice Ministry could not be reached for comment but the statistics come amid intense debate over the surge in divorce rates in the birthplace of Islam.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The High Court in the Red Sea port of Jeddah said earlier this year divorce rates in the city had risen by 60 percent over the last two years against 39 percent in the capital Riyadh and 18 percent in the Eastern Province, home to a Shia minority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Saudi Arabia, which follows an austere form of Sunni Islam, allows men to repudiate their wives.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâIt is impossible to have healthy relationships in Saudi Arabia. The laws have given men full authority while women are deprived of their rights and freedom,ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ rights activist Wajiha Al Howeidar told Reuters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While a few women have grown up in relatively liberal homes and refrain from marriage at an early age, many see in marriage a way out of protective parental homes, Al Howeidar said.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâThey end up in arranged marriages where there are no affinities and no romance,ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ she said.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well if it makes you happier, for every two marriages in the U.S. in 1990's, there was one divorce.

[issy2]

Well if it makes you happier, for every two marriages in the U.S. in 1990's, there was one divorce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But at least people in the US get to choose who they marry.

[darkmage099]

 

Well if it makes you happier, for every two marriages in the U.S. in 1990's, there was one divorce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But at least people in the US get to choose who they marry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

W0000Sh!

[tripsis]

 

Well if it makes you happier, for every two marriages in the U.S. in 1990's, there was one divorce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But at least people in the US get to choose who they marry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I remember reading something that was like, "In cultures that require an arranged marriage, there is a much lower divorce rate.. Yet a much higher suicide rate." Pretty interesting :P

[insane]

 

Well if it makes you happier, for every two marriages in the U.S. in 1990's, there was one divorce.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But at least people in the US get to choose who they marry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's not the point. The point is that those in arranged marriages have lower divorce rates than those in voluntary marriages.