Forcing Women to Marry Their Rapists


Pages: 1 2

Morocco did update its Family Code in 2004. It contains eleven subject headings. Reforms include adopting modern words that remove “degrading and debasing” terms for women, equality of age in marriage for both sexes, and expanding divorce, property and child rights for women. Heading two is germane to the case at hand. It entitles “the woman who has come of age to tutelage (guardianship) as a right, and she may exercise it according to her choice and interests, on the basis of an interpretation of a holy verse stipulating that a woman cannot be compelled to marry against her will: ‘…place not difficulties in the way of their marrying their husbands, if it is agreed between them in kindness.’” A woman may, of her own free will, delegate tutelage to her father or a male relative.

Despite this statute, all reports on this story indicate that Amina Filali was indeed forced to marry against her will. Furthermore, as defined in Heading three, which stipulates 18 as the minimum age for marriage, there is an out. The age limit may be reduced by a judge “only in justified cases.” Thus, despite reform, one is left to conclude one of two things. Either a 16-year-old girl does not have the same rights as an 18-year-old woman, or rape, when balanced against the culturally construed loss of honor incurred by the victim’s family, is seen as justification for forcing marriage to a rapist.

Measured against the reality of a government study conducted last year revealing that about 25 percent of Moroccan women had been sexually assaulted at least once, it would appear a substantial number of Moroccan women are faced with an odious choice: keep an assault secret, endure possible abuse (or worse) from one’s own family for their loss of honor, or marry the assaulter. Such might explain a 2009 UN report revealing that only 3.6 cases of rape were reported per 100,000 women in Morocco.

All in all, there can be little argument that Article 475, coupled with both the definitions of family dishonor and the generally low status of Moroccan women, reflects rather badly upon Muslim “tradition” and Sharia law. What was also disgraceful, however, was the report on this story by the left-leaning Associated Press, which noted that there is a “similar injunction in the Old Testament’s Book of Deuteronomy” regarding the exoneration of rapists who marry their victims. That the AP would make such a ham-fisted effort to equate Biblical passages more than two thousand years old with a modern-day Moroccan statute (and still-active cultural imperatives in the Muslim world) is the essence of morally relative, multiculturalist drivel.

Yet it is the kind of multiculturalist drivel that has gained a foothold in the West. This past Saturday, Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, announced his retirement. He is best remembered for his 2008 statement in which he contended that the adoption of “certain aspects” of Sharia Law in the UK was “unavoidable,” Muslims living in Britain should not be faced with “the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty,” and the UK must “face up to the fact” that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system. He suggested the adoption of Sharia law would facilitate “social cohesion.”

Social cohesion? One is left to imagine what the former Archbishop might have advised Amina Filali to do had she been living in Britain. The “cultural loyalty” that turned her family against her, caused a judge to give her to her rapist, and allowed that rapist to beat her with impunity while they were married, is an integral part of Muslim culture and Sharia law.

16-year-old Amina Filali opted for suicide by rat poison. She joins countless other Muslim women who have died or been killed for honor’s sake. Such “honor” is utterly incompatible with Western values. The multiculturalists, whose entire philosophy rests on a “split the difference” premise that all cultures are equally viable, are terminally naive. If the West is to survive, their odious philosophy must be completely rejected.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • Bamaguje

    “In Morocco, the law protects public morality but not the individual” – Fouzia Assouli.

    Can some explain to me how a law that allows rapists to go scot free and punishes their victims by forced marriage protects "public morality"?
    What kind of absurd 'public morality' is that?

    • Whatsinaname

      Uh, that would be Islamic public morality. Hint: take everything you know to be moral, turn it upside down and you have Muslim public morality. Take everything you know to be immoral, cruel, unjust, outrageous and you have "morality" in Muslim lands. This my friend is the very essence of Sharia and Islamic culture.

    • kafir4life

      It's just islam. islam is just a gutter cult. It was invented by a pedophilic madman named mohamat. It's disgusting, and there is nothing good about it. That's their version of "morality".

  • davarino

    The Arch Bishop is a boob and so is anyone else who proposes such nonsense. What is it that made the West so great? It wasnt by adopting every back woods, third world country's philosophies and jurisprudence. There should be no mixing or adulterating what we have in the West with anything else. And if the immigrant doesnt like it then they can go home.

  • maturin20

    Can someone explain to me why Arnold Ahlert has any business governing the social mores of Morocco?

    • Zionista

      you're too stupid to understand – and you probably have no clue as to why the gutless wonders in the "women's' movement" don't have the nerve to confront the real enemy of women worldwide – SHARIA – but then again, you're used to women (and men) wearing robes and hoods.

      • maturin20

        I am?

    • Whatsinaname

      Arnold Ahlert is not governing the laws of Morocco. He doesn't live in Morocco, nor is he their ruler or any member of their government or ruling party. He wrote an article about what happened there. He has every right to do that, you idiot! Get a life!

      • maturin20

        Really? It seems to me like he is trying to make himself Grand Vizeer, Prime Minister, and Exchequer of Morocco.

  • DrBukk

    Would the multiculturists feel that the Aztec religion is just as valid as Islam? They ripped out the hearts of teenagers chosen for their beauty. Threw them down the steps of their pyramids. Some were thrown in cenotes. They killed quetzals for tail feathers FCS!

  • Creature of haste

    For the record, the penal code in Morocco stipulates that indecent acts perpetrated or attempted without violence over a child under 18 years, carry from 2 to 5 years of imprisonment (article 484); indecent acts perpetrated or attempted with violence against a minor of less than 18 years of age, carry form 10 to 20 years of imprisonment (article 485) – furthermore, if the indecent act against females under 18 years of age causes the loss of virginity, the crime will be punished with 20 – 30 years of imprisonment (article 485 – 486).

    In Morocco the age of consent is set at 18 (tied to wedlock); however, in "justified cases" the marriageable age can be reduced. In rural areas especially, it's common for young teens (under 18) of appropriate age to wed. Keeping things in perspective, in parts of Europe the age of consent is as low as 15 (France, Denmark, Sweden, Greece), & in other parts, lower (Germany, 14; Italy, 14; Spain, 13). Furthermore, article 475 does not exonerate rapists, rather the article deals strictly with cases of statutory rape (intercourse with anyone under the age of 18) wherein the courts would judge according to evidence (as with all court cases) and might only exonerate the adult party by way of marriage along the premise that the minor was consenting, is adjudged to be of sufficient age and that all relevant parties would settle for marriage. (The premise made in accordance with articles 484 – 486).

  • Whatsinaname

    It is a good idea to keep bringing these incidents to light in the West. However, we all have seen that in honor killings committed both in the West and Islamic countries, the mother is involved in the killing. Muslim women are active supporters of Sharia, establishing the Caliphate, intimidation of non-muslims here at universities and in Islamic, jihad-supporting organizations throughout the world. It is unlikely that Muslim women will ever be able to connect the dots that the culture which supports injustice against them enables and supports injustice agains non-muslims.

  • Ghostwriter

    Forcing a woman to marry her rapist? That's vile! Can't Maturin20 realize that something like THAT is wrong and SHOULD be condemned. What world is HE living in?

    • kafir4life

      muslim.

  • W. C. Taqiyya

    Even young, female Muslim victims are stronger than all the western feminist posers put together. That unyielding strength is why their brutal culture is winning. It will take much more than smart bombs, slogans or U.N. resolutions to stop them. It's a kill or be killed world baby, the zombies are here.

  • JakeTobias

    I think the reason western feminists do not talk about sharia law, is because they do not want liberal males to find out there is no such thing as martial rape under sharia.

  • John Genovese

    Deuteronomy 22:28 – 29 says that a raped woman must marry her rapist. Looks like the only difference between christians and muslims is that these muslims actually obey their holy book. Imagine that.

    • someone

      If you actually read the Bible, you would know we don't have to follow that rule anymore. It's been like 2,000+ years since that's been abolished when Jesus died….

      really ignorant statement…