Liquidrage

--Mamuda Aliyu Shinkafi, Zamfara deputy governor

--From <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2519595.stm" target="_blank">BBC article</a>

So...

I don't agree with the author that created all this chaos. Mohammed wouldn't have chosen a bride from the contest. Nope, he was too fucked in the head to know his ass for a hole in the ground let alone when he was looking at a beautifull woman. The guy was clearly a derganged lunatic who today would be locked up on sight.

Hypernovean

Now this is truly terrifying. That this person can call for the death of someone who did something to offend Islam, and say it's a religious duty. And have it declared a legal act.
When a religion has enough power to be able to declare the life of someone, who isn't even an adherent of that religion, forfeit, for vaguely offending that religion's figurehead... *fuck*
Sound similar to the kind of things governments and churches did in the dark ages?

fando

I find a morbid fascination with the phenomenon of fatwa. It helps me understand how things like the Crusades happened. If there were a Social Sciences board (hint hint ), I'd love to dig into this deeper.

lpetrich

If one is a Muslim who believes that beauty contests are wicked, then one may indeed conclude that beauty contestants are unworthy possible wives for the Prophet.

But a Muslim who thinks beauty contests OK might not find it a rather cute thought.

I wonder how this is being played out in various Islamic communities.

echidna

Actually, given one of Mohammed’s 13 wives, Aishah, was 6 when he married her and 9 when he consumated the marriage (depending on your sources), I wouldn’t be surprised if he was attracted in part to nubile women.

Quite a range of ages in fact, two 17 year olds all the way through to the widowed Sauda who was around 50.

[ November 28, 2002: Message edited by: echidna ]

[ November 28, 2002: Message edited by: echidna ]</p>

echidna

There again, I think it more likely he would have been locked up for paedophilia, unless you’re referring to the deranged lunacy of wanting 13 mothers-in-law …

The Other Michael

There was an article on NPR on this yesterday, and they interviewed someone who pointed out that fatwas are more like a legal opinion from a lawyer, and are not an actual judgement from someone who has the power to enforce a judgement.

So mullah A can issue a fatwa (opinion) that the Koran implies Mohammed would have only consumed gummy bears, and that Walnettos are the food of Satan, and that anyone caught eating Walnettos should be pummled.

But mulla B can issue his fatwa pointing out that mullah A is a chowderhead as anyone can plainly see that the Koran implies that Mohammed would really have preffered licorice whips to either, and that eating (or advocating the eating of) gummy bears would be grounds for stoning.

Both fatwas are "official" fatwas, but it is up to the individual Moslem to decide which, if either, should be followed.

It was also pointed out that since there is no central heirarchy to Islam you can't have the "one true fatwa", unlike in Catholicism where the Pope can make statements that are binding on all Catholics.

cheers,
Michael

David M. Payne

I had some guy calling for a fatwa on me for <a href="http://www.secweb.org/asset.asp?AssetID=236" target="_blank">The Story of Bob,</a> on the <a href="http://www.faithfreedom.org" target="_blank">www.faithfreedom.org</a> web site, and I thought a fatwa was a death sentence from Islam. But I learned it could be any kind of ruling by most any Mullah. Only when it is like the one issued to Salmon Rushdie from a governmental religious figure, is it something to worry about. Unless you live in an Islamic nation of course, then you have some real concern for your safety.

David