The Bittersweet Player – Clear your browser cache to hear the latest play list.
It’s hard to imagine their America. Perhaps there were some Muslims who helped fight for this country to form its beginnings. I have heard the claims of it somewhere in the last few years, out there in the stultifying ether of the mainstream media. There is nothing in our primer history books about it. But then, should there be? History is written by the victors.
War has always settled lands. There is, within the traditions of humanity, led for all this time predominantly by men, no other method which has been used. And the bankers have always played both sides of all the wars. It’s their tradition. It costs money to wage wars. Lots of it.
I am the third generation from four immigrant families out of Germany, England, Poland, Russia and the Ukraine. My ancestors were economically forced to come here because of intolerable conditions in Europe. In Europe, upward commercial mobility was severely restricted and reserved for privileged folks, mostly. There is no economic historian that would dispute it. The middle to late 19th century was no picnic for my folks. But they were hard workers. They also worked smart. Moreover, when they all landed here, things weren’t easy for them in this land either. There was one thing in America that wasn’t in Europe, a little something called liberty. And my family practiced working with their liberties in the best traditions of any American family. They assimilated and adopted the American culture into their beings. They became, as did their daughters and sons, Americans.
“Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people; it is wholly inadequate for any other.” – John Adams 2nd US president
“We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.” – James Madison 4th US President
Oligarchs emanating from all persuasion and political monstrosity have dominated property during the entire human history of the planet, recorded or un. Nothing new there. It doesn’t matter what culture they’re from. Only one way to handle oligarchs, beat ‘em at their own game. You can’t wrestle with someone who plays by anything but a lethal set of rules, with anything other than the same lethality they bring to the match. You can’t come to a gun fight with a knife. To match wits otherwise is a foolish game only lambs play. Even moral humans know that. Thriving is honorable.
Muslims consider themselves pious. More pious than non-Muslims. That’s their problem. Religious arrogance. As well, there isn’t one set of dominant oligarchs who have not likewise been anything but arrogant about their beliefs. And to the victors goes the spoils. That’s not going to change. It’s a human condition.
A lie begets a lie.
Presently many Muslims, whether secretly or out in the open, are not Americans first, that’s my judgment. Not this crop. They left their oppressions to come here and make use of our markets. They’re here for the money. Well, who isn’t? Yet, they are foreign to our heritage. They feign humility, yet expect dhimmitude. Well, they’d like to try and sell us their way of life, and by any means necessary. It’s built into their Qur’an. And that particular psychological codex is foreign to American ethic. All you have to do is read it. If not, take my word for it, it’s in there. Muhammed borrowed the ten commandments from someone we know. Was even married to a wealthy Jewis, Safiyyah.
There is nothing more moral than making an honest living.
Therefore, Americans, whether newly natural or aged, as in my family, find Muslim orthodoxy culturally repugnant because too large a portion of their minions expresses a manner of behavior which is wholly un-American. No, they will have to assimilate just like everyone else has, there is no other way. There is no compromise. Period. Be American, learn our traditions, or go home. In America, polygamy has been found to be repugnant. It’s our rule of law that dictates this, as well as, our traditions.
As for the oligarchs, we’ll not be rid of them anytime soon, they’ve always existed. And us Americans, we’ll have to do as we’ve always done to get along; survive outside the watchful eyes of their jealousies. Our collective blood pools have paid for this Constitution of the United States of America, and that’s our culture. So, we’ll not be bowing to the Muslims for their convenience. They’re most welcome to practice in our markets if their commerce can cut the muster. But, let them settle their disputes amongst themselves.
If they wish to engage Americans, they’ll have to engage US as our traditions and laws here dictate. We’ll not be letting them take one of the most enlightened set of documents ever composed by a body of men, aided by their families and keen devices, and argue their positions as being more legitimate, or compatible with America, outside of American tradition, just because these documents are the most republican and liberating, that has ever existed. Awfully brash of the Muslims to come here, and tell us about their laws as being superior. We’ll allow you your religions, yes…we’ll even allow you to proselytize here, just don’t get too carried away with yourselves, it never winds up well, no? We do have our traditions, and we like them just fine the way they are.
Now, if Muslims don’t like it, they can go home. No one is stopping them. If they’ve got something to peddle we think is worth something, whether they’re practicing commerce on our shores or from overseas as importations, and there’s nothing in the market that can compete with it for the price, we’ll entertain their contracts. As is our pleasure, and as our guests, we’re more than happy to let them compete with us. If not, as all Americans know, we’ll look elsewhere to fill the need. We don’t acknowledge their religious convictions into our beings to entertain the notion of conducing commerce. It is unacceptable and wholly presumptuous of them to entertain that we should, lest they forget their dignity and humility as our guests.
As for the oil barons wearing their flowing robes, and their harams of women, imagine…grown men and women still dressing like that, talk about eschewing modernity, well…Nixon and Kissinger snookered those, ahem…men, and that’s, as we Americans say, the way the cookie crumbles. They’re lucky we built those oil fields for them in the first place. You see, we wanted to keep our vast reserves intact here until we really needed them. And, as I look at my watch, that time is presently just around the corner.
In the meantime…please keep your noses out of our homes, unless we invite you to come in. If you force your way in, we may elect to use such device as we deem fit. We are trusted as citizens to use arms to protect our families. That’s American. You see? Even the ads that accompany this page because of the relational semantics of targeted advertising by Google are for Muslims. So, well isn’t that nice of us? America’s Google Corporation is considering your sensibilities.
Too, we Americans have spent our hard earned money to help Israel remain as it is, and that’s for the Jewish people, our allies. The Muslims are lucky to have their Dome of the Rock left in place on top of Solomon’s Temple, more than gracious of the Israeli’s don’t you think? Were it my country I would have torn it down in 1948. It would do your people well to tell the children of Arafat, the Nabataeans, to assimilate or immigrate to a neighbor, instead of lobbing Molotov cocktails and bombs into Jewish neighborhoods. It hasn’t procured for your people anything in 63 years. I don’t see it happening anytime soon. The Jewish people are well armed, we Americans made sure of that. And America is not going to be biting the dust anytime soon. Don’t underestimate our resolve to remain as we are, Americans, sovereign and free.
If these remarks are considered by ultra or moderate (if there is such a thing) orthodox Muslims as racist or xenophobic…please consult your mirrors. If you’re an American first, who in turn worships Allah, then you should have no problem with the position the rest of us Americans hold.
That Ms. Geller has to argue the American cause is in some ways preposterous, but then many Americans really don’t know who they are…so she needs to remind them quite a bit. Presently, the need is for it to happen every day until the rest of America remembers herself once again. She has a bit of amnesia at the moment.
That Ms. Geller acknowledges the conversation, is a tribute to her dignity as a human to engage your preposterous notions as barely legitimate inside of American shores…far too gracious of a posture considering your arrogance’s, which are well documented by now in all of our recent collective memory.
Here then is Pam…
…nearly 70 percent said they believe that the U.S. should legalize polygamy…42 percent of those surveyed said they were either in, or knew others in polygamous marriages within the local Muslim community. Thirty nine percent said they would engage in a polygamous marriage if it were legal in the United States.
Islamic supremacism on the march in America. Just as the Muslim Brotherhood groups in the US, like Hamas-linked CAIR, exploited the the black experience in America to impose Islam on the secular marketplace playing the civil rights card. They are now using the ‘gay marriage’ narrative to legalize multiple wives under the sharia. Read it all.
What’s next? Child brides? That is sanctioned under the sharia. That’s an “alternative lifestyle” sanctioned by Islam and “religious freedom under the Constitution.” Honor killings? Clitorectomies? All sanctioned under the sharia and as Ground Zero mosque Imam Rauf reminded us in his book, you cannot cherry pick the sharia. It’s all or ………
In his own book from 2000, “Islam: A Sacred Law,” he wrote this on p. 58: “And since a Shari’ah is understood as a law with God at its center, it is not possible in principle to limit the Shari’ah to some aspects of human life and leave out others.”
As Legal Marriage Is Redefined, Some Muslim Call for Decriminalizing Polygamy
The legalization of gay marriage in six states and the continued efforts toward legalizing it in the rest of the country has opened the flood gates that have, for hundreds of years defined legal marriage in the United States as the union between one man and one woman.
As more proponents of gay marriage push bills through Congress and rally votes that support marriage as a constitutional right for all citizens regardless of sexual orientation another group that remains decidedly outside the legal confines of marriage is slowly entering the limelight.
Over 130 years ago a decision was made that criminalized the practice of polygamy in the United States.
Despite the redefinition of legal marriage to include homosexual couples, the country still grapples at the idea of polygamy, a commonly misunderstood primarily religiously based practice.
With an estimated 50,000 to 100,000 people living in polygamous situations in the U.S. today, few have seen their actions reprimanded in court. This is likely because many live in secrecy out of fear that exposure of their practices will result in loss of jobs, break apart their families, or land them in jail. However, even in cases where polygamy is known, few states move to actually prosecute the individuals involved.
While some choose to quietly live their lives as they please, married legally only to one woman but to others only through religious ceremonies, there are murmurs among the polygamist community as the country moves toward the legalization of gay marriage.
Just as the gay community has fought for equal treatment under the law, polygamists argue the same. As citizens of the United States, they argue, they should have the right to legally marry whoever they please, or however many they please.
In the same regard that the gay community faced stark opposition from religious organizations that diligently fought, and continue to fight the idea of gay marriage on religious grounds, polygamists communities face similar religious stigmas.
While the U.S. Constitution boasts a separation of church and state, which ultimately helped the gay community overcome the opposition, it also guarantees the free exercise of religion which has somewhat ironically been the biggest obstacle for the polygamist community.
Because polygamy is considered a derivative of certain religious beliefs it would logically seem as though the practice of polygamy would then be protected under constitutional law. However, this is not the case, and has not been since Reynolds vs. United States in 1978 in which the court refused to recognize polygamy as a legitimate religious practice. Instead, it was deemed it as “almost exclusively a feature of the life of Asiatic and African people.” Later decisions showed no progress in accepting polygamy as a legitimate religious practice despite its longstanding historic presence in Christianity, Judaism and Islam. Instead the court declared it to be “contrary to the spirit of Christianity and of the civilization which Christianity has produced in the Western World,” equating it to a type of barbarism.
Many argue that polygamy is an exception to the free exercise of religion because known cases of polygamous marriages of young girls. This cast a shadow on the practice and many ignorantly equated it with pedophilia. Recent attacks on the Prophet Muhammad also equated his marriage to Aisha, who was nine at the time, as an act of pedophilia. In cases where religious practices are deemed harmful to individuals or to the public, the free exercise of religion no longer applies.
While Islam itself does not condone acts of homosexuality and though the mainstream Muslim community remains largely uninvolved with polygamy in the United States, there are a minority who still engage in the practice though largely in secrecy for fear of retribution. While some masajids require legal proof of marriage prior to granting an Islamic marriage, some Imams’ like Baltimore city’s Hassan Amin believe polygamy to be a god-given right that cannot be denied to those who are willing and able despite the potential legal ramifications.
“I don’t have any problem with that because it’s Deen. I’m doing it for religion,” said Amin who admits to performing polygamous marriages.
Amin, a sociology instructor at Sojourner-Douglass College of Baltimore regularly discusses polygamy in his classroom. Not only does he note its religious significance but the benefits it can have in American society, particularly in areas like Baltimore city where the poverty rate is high and many women find themselves on the welfare roll.
“We have in the world more women than men and if a man has the ability to take care of more than one women he should be able to do that,” said Amin. “As far as legalization, I think they should…We should strive to have it legalized because Allah has already legalized it.”
While Amin feels strongly about the good polygamy can do for the community, others feel as though the issue of polygamy is one that should remain in a historical context.
“The family institution in the U.S, whether it is Muslim or non-Muslim, is very delicate. The idea of having many partners and many, many children who are neglected or whose needs will not be met fully or even who will compete for gains is not a healthy one in this society. This society is full of much corruption without the addition of internal corruption. It is allowed in Islam, I do not argue this fact. Our Prophet allowed this but in today’s time we do not have the pure intentions and love for one another as they did in the past,” said one individual in a recent survey on polygamy conducted by The Muslim Link.
Approximately 42 percent of those surveyed said they were either in, or knew others in polygamous marriages within the local Muslim community. Thirty nine percent said they would engage in a polygamous marriage if it were legal in the United States.
One woman, who wished to remain anonymous, having been part of a polygamous relationship for fourteen years expressed her support for the institution arguing its ability to solve many moral ailments that plague today’s society.
“I believe the government should legalize polygyny because it is lawful in Islaam. It would enable all the wives to have the same legal status…As a matter of fact, I have discussed the issue with many non-Muslim women as well. The majority of them say that if polygyny was conducted the way that it is supposed to be according to the Qur’aan and Sunnah, they would have no problem with it. It is much better than committing adultery, fornication and having illegitimate children,” she wrote in response to the survey.
Born and raised in Christian family, she married a non-Muslim man at the age of twenty-two. One year later both her and her husband converted to Islam. They lived in a mongomous marriage for nine years before her husband approached her about marrying a second wife.
“When my husband told me that he wanted to marry another woman we discussed the issue and the three of us met and had discussions as well. There was a public nikah and waleemah at our masjid, and the whole community, including our children and [I], attended,” she said.
Though the second marriage ended in divorce after fourteen years, it ended on good terms.
Although those who said they would engage in polygamy if it were legal are the minority, nearly 70 percent said they believe that the U.S. should legalize polygamy now that it is beginning to legalize gay marriage.
As for opinions on whether or not Imams, like Amin should be allowed to conduct polygamous marriages despite polygamy being illegal in the United States, the results were almost split right down the middle with approximately 54 percent against the idea.
Polygamy is arguably not the most popular practice in the United States and even within religious communities where polygamy had an undeniable historical significance. However, the First Amendment was meant to protect even the least popular of practices on the basis that though they may not appeal to the general public, their existence and the rights therein should and will always be protected under constitutional law.
Still, some feel as though the Muslim community should be focused on fighting to protect the rights that they do have rather than rallying behind ones that could send the wrong message.
“We also need to consider that legalizing an issue makes it “okay” in a lot of people’s minds. If polygamy were okay, people who don’t understand it’s conditions may enter into such relationships that could prove very unhealthy, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. The issue of polygamy is not fully understood by our own Muslim community for it to be taken to the U.S. government. I really think we should focus on fighting for the rights we currently are guaranteed under law but are not always granted,” wrote one young woman.
While anti-sodomy laws outlined in Lawrence vs. Texas were brought down and with them the ability to criminalize the acts of homosexuals in the United States, polygamists must still face the reality that their marriages cannot be made legal so long as the decision of Reynold vs. United States stands.
As states move toward legalizing gay marriage, the criminalization of polygamy is a seemingly striking inconsistency in constitutional law.
As for the American Muslim community and the practice of polygamy, Amin believes it is the responsibility of the Muslim leadership to represent its benefits both religiously and socially.
“As an Imam I have a responsibility to put Islam out there in all its beauty and glory. Even if I stand alone in doing this, Islam has be be out there and more imams have to stand up for Islam,” he said.
Though he doesn’t believe it is a necessary practice for everyone and notes that only those able to practice polygamy within the rules laid out in Islamic teaching should consider engaging in it, Amin feels its a reality that the American Muslim community should not hide or feel embarrassed by.
For those who disagree with him he simply quoted a passage from the Qur’an, “Lakum deenukum waliyadin,” For you your way, for me mine.”
The argument remains, be it gay marriage or polygamous marriage, the rights of the people should not be based on their popularity but rather on the constitutional laws that are meant to protect them.