VOICE OF GLOBAL UMMAH

Volume 165, January 9, 2011
St. Louis, Missouri, USA

Editors: Mohamed & Rashida Ziauddin

In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent and the most Merciful

EDITORIAL:

In the previous issue, we dealt with the slow but growing acceptance and tolerance for incest. In this E-Zine, our focus is on OPEN MARRIAGE and related issues.

As we mentioned earlier, as members of the global ummah, we need to hold firm on the rope of Islam, avoid criticism of others and respect the right of others in terms of freedom of choice. We don't believe that we have a right to impose our values on others, for it states clearly in the Holy Quran:

"There is no compulsion in religion".

HADITH PERTAINING TO FAMILY:

English translation of Holy Hadith (Sahih Bukhari) by M. Muhsin Khan taken from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/

Above from: www.ishwar.com

(1) Volume 7, Book 64, Number 263

Narrated Abu Mas'ud Al-Ansari: The Prophet said, "When a Muslim spends something on his family intending to receive Allah's reward it is regarded as Sadaqa for him."

(2) Volume 7, Book 64, Number 276

Narrated Al-Aswad bin Yazid: I asked 'Aisha "What did the Prophet use to do at home?" She said,:

"He used to work for his family, and when he heard the Adhan (call for the prayer), he would go out."

(3) Volume 7, Book 64, Number 282

Narrated Um Salama: I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shall I get a reward (in the Hereafter) if I spend on the children of Abu Salama and do not leave them like this and like this (i.e., poor) but treat them like my children?" The Prophet said, "Yes, you will be rewarded for that which you will spend on them."

(4) Volume 7, Book 64, Number 285

Narrated Um Habiba: (the wife of the Prophet) I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Will you marry my sister, the daughter of Abu Sufyan." The Prophet said, "Do you like that?" I said, "Yes, for I am not your only wife, and the person I like most to share the good with me, is my sister." He said, "That is not lawful for me." I said, "O Allah's Apostle! We have heard that you want to marry Durra, the daughter of Abu Salama." He said, "You mean the daughter of Um Salama?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Even if she were not my step-daughter, she is unlawful for me, for she is my foster niece. Thuwaiba suckled me and Abu Salama. So you should not present to me your daughters and sisters."

Narrated 'Ursa: Thuwaiba had been a slave girl whom Abu Lahab had emancipated.

(www.wisdomintoislam.com)

(www.hilalplace.com)

VERSES FROM HOLY QURAN:

Below from www.biharanjuman.org

Holy Quran: 005.005 TRANSLATION BY YUSUF ALI:

"This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them. (Lawful unto you in marriage) are (not only) chaste women who are believers, but chaste women among the People of the Book, revealed before your time,- when ye give them their due dowers, and desire chastity, not lewdness, nor secret intrigues if any one rejects faith, fruitless is his work, and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all spiritual good).

Holy Quran: 017.032

TRANSLATION BY YUSUF ALI:

"Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)".

PART I:

OPEN MARRIAGE




Open Marriage Styles

Couples in open marriages may prefer different kinds of extramarital relationships. Couples who prefer extramarital relationships emphasizing love and emotional involvement have a poly amorous style of open marriage. Couples who prefer extramarital relationships emphasizing sexual gratification and recreational friendships have a swinging style of open marriage.

These distinctions may depend on psychological factors such as sociosexuality and may contribute to the formation of separate Polyamory and Swinging communities.

Despite their distinctions, however, all open marriages share common issues:
- the lack of social acceptance
- the need to maintain the health of their relationship and avoid neglect, and
-the need to manage jealous rivalry.

Many couples have rules such as:
-No emotional attachment,
-must use protection, never in 'our bed/home',
-no illegitimate children,
-and/or must or must not know who the other person is, and so on.

Some open marriages are one sided as well. One partner who may need more sexual gratification than the other is free to seek it out where he/she sees fit, all while maintaining a functional emotional relationship with their full-time partner.
www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_marriage

(www.womenonthefence.com)

An Open Marriage is a marriage in which each partner is free to enter into extraneous sexual relationships without guilt or jealousy from the other

PART II:

Monogamy is for losers:

www.moonbattery.com

December 11, 2009

(condensed version)

Gregory of Yardale

We right-wingers have a stereotype of the social left that they put sexual gratification ahead of every other personal value. We stereotype left-wingers as hedonists, who disdain personal responsibility, and who would rather lower every one's values to the lowest common denominator than try to raise people to a higher standard. This stereotype is pretty much validated on a daily basis. Today, we read that Jenny Block, who writes for the dying left-wing publication Newsweek, writes that the answer to adultery is...

"to not have any expectations of commitment or monogamy in marriage".

She describes her own "marriage" as a sort of perpetual 70's key party, with the cliched 21st Century bisexual twist.

"First we both dated the same woman. Then my husband dated her and I saw other people. And then they broke up and I dabbled until I met a woman, who like my husband, I cannot imagine being without. And so now it's her and me and him and him and me, and we are all fabulous friends. Everyone gets their needs met. No one feels left out or guilty, and the only time any of us questions our lifestyle is when we let those Disney movies come creeping back into our heads."

In other words, it's not adultery if nobody cares. Some of us still naively believe that commitment to one person is a worthwhile ideal, that it spares one from the danger of STD's, and provides a stable environment to raise children who *won't* grow up to be sociopaths. But we are also the kind of people who don't believe in killing babies for the sake of sexual gratification; that's how screwed up our values are.

Also, there was a time when people would only write about the wonders of open marriage in the kind of magazines whose pages stick together. But one of the triumphs of the social left has been to make it acceptable for once respectable magazines like Newsweek to express this stuff.

PART III:

‘Open marriage’ author tells all

www.readthehook.com
by Marissa D'Orazio
(condensed version)
Jul 15, 2008

(Jenny Block)

BOOK:
"Open: Love, Sex, and Life in an Open Marriage".
SEAL PRESS
“It was weird that it wasn’t weird.”

This is how Jenny Block, author of Open: Love, Sex, and Life in an Open Marriage, describes the first sexual encounter she and her husband had with a mutual friend as part of their open marriage.

According to Block, the friend was “a younger, hilarious, intelligent woman,” and their relationship lasted for years. Although Block, a Dallas resident, discovered her bisexuality in her twenties, she always thought that it would eventually translate into her finding one man to be with for the rest of her life. But three years into her marriage, she had a six-month affair with a woman that led her to wonder if that dream could actually become reality. “I had a lot of questions,” she says. “I kept saying, ‘But you still love him.’

I did some research and found out that a lot of people are doing marriage in their own way.” Block’s husband, Christopher, was not initially enthusiastic about the idea of an open marriage. “He thought I was a crazy person at first,” she says. “He was wondering if the truth was that I didn’t want to be with him at all.”

But after many philosophical talks, he was persuaded to accept her point of view and agreed to an “open marriage,” which she defines as, “when two people are married but allowed to have other partners. It might just mean sex, but for us, it’s a relationship.”

That led to their affair with their mutual friend. Block denies the common perception– that she and her husband are swingers. Swingers, she explains, focus primarily on sexual relationships and leave love out of the picture. Block practices something called polyamory– meaning that she is allowed to love more than one person. Claiming, in fact, to be “boring and average,” in the book Block explores “how a nice girl like me can come to a place like this.”

PART IV

WHAT IS OPEN FIDELITY ?
www..openfidelity.info
(condensed version)

About Open Fidelity

Open Fidelity describes a new way of thinking about faithfulness in sexual relationships – a way that doesn’t assume that faithfulness means monogamy. Many people find monogamy impossible but still want to be honest and responsible in their relationships.

Open Fidelity is one way to reconcile these two things in one ethical way of living. It is also a good way to enable partners to fulfil their deepest desires in other ways than monogamy. Fidelity – or faithfulness – basically means keeping the promises you have made. This means: * having your partner’s needs in mind in all your decisions * working with your partner to fulfill the deepest desires that you both have * being honest with each other at all times about what you really desire, even if that means sex with someone else

Sexual relationships can be faithful in this sense while allowing partners to pursue what they most desire, even if that means sex with someone outside the relationships. Open fidelity means making realistic promises that you can keep, and then keeping them. If you are open and faithful, there is a world of possibilities to try.

You and your partner (or spouse) could have short flings or longer-term lovers as well as your committed partnership. You could try swinging, going to sex parties or meeting another couple. Or you could seek out several long-term loving relationships – also known as polyamory. It isn’t easy, but it is possible and it can be wonderfully rewarding.

PART V:

POINTS AGAINST OPEN MARRIAGE:

www.mfgmarriage.com/open-marriage-just-say-no/

We’d like to offer the following reasons why open marriage is a bad idea:

1. Open Marriage Can Be Extremely Damaging To Your Spouse’s Self Esteem

Not always, but most often, one spouse proposes to have an open marriage. What is really being communicated is that their partner is somehow deficient, not capable or not good enough in some area(s) of the relationship. Imagine the negative impact on your spouse.

2. Open Marriage Is An Diversion

Successful marriages require work. The most important work is on one’s self. A successful marriage is not so much as finding the right person as it is in being the right person. Open marriage only diverts us from doing the work necessary to create meaningful, long term, mutually satisfying relationships.

3. Open Marriages Can Be Socially Embarrassing and Humiliating

Society generally frowns on open marriages. And when it is discovered that a couple is engaged in an open marriage, it can be embarrassing not only for the couple but especially for their children. Your response might be that “I don’t care what society thinks. I’m living my life the way I choose.” That’s fine. But remember that there are always consequences for the choices we make.
"So our advice is to say no to open marriage".

PART VI

Open Marriage: Is it healthy?

By RAJAN Bhonsle, MINNU Bhonsle in Marital and Premarital Issues
www.completewellbeing.com
(condensed version)

Open Marriage, as it is called, is a mockery of the sanctity of marriage, and is, in effect, no marriage at all. Today, it is considered fashionable, trendy, liberal and mature, and you are with the times, respecting each other's "space," if you believe in, or practice, the Open Marriage concept - i.e., consensual extra-marital relations for both spouses.

Flirting between married couples is also rampant in elitist society, and if you do not have a taste for it, you are considered square and primitive. The famous song by American artist Paul Anka, "I'm a one man woman, I'm a one woman man," is mocked at by such "mature, exclusive" people. However, available data show that the pleasure of extra-marital sex is lower for men and women, in general, than what relates to overall sexual pleasure in a normal, happy marriage.

THE END

VOICE OF GLOBAL UMMAH

Volume 164, January 2, 2010

St. Louis, Missouri, USA

Editors: Mohamed & Rashida Ziauddin

In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent and the Most Merciful

Editorial:

As we mentioned in our previous issues, the traditional family has continued to be literally attacked from different forces that have raised their heads in the form of a social trend with the pretext of appealing to one and all to have greater tolerance.

We ask:
Where do you draw the line for such tolerance and how far are you willing to be tolerant ?

Examples of three such social trends that would cripple the traditional family are the increased acceptance and legitimization of gay marriage, open marriage and incestuous unions. In the past issue, we highlighted the issue of gay marriage and in this issue, we wanted to highlight the issues of incest. Slowly but surely there are signs that one of the modern world's last taboos is on the verge of being broken.

Once the marriage of a gay couple is acceptable then needless to say, the floodgate of various deviations from the TRADITIONAL FAMILY has opened up. Would the second step to demand equal rights to have sex and marriage be from adult HETEROSEXUAL INCESTUOUS COUPLES who currently are like the gay couples were in the past (behind the closet) ?

There is already an instance, where an adult father and adult daughter are demanding no interference in their sexual relationship using some of the similar arguments that gay couples had used (two consenting adults should be free to do what they choose in their bed room).

(whitemaleoppressor.com)

Would the third step be a combination of above two groups (Gay) + (Incestuous couple) = Gay and lesbian incestuous couple (Adult father-adult son; adult mother-adult daughter) demanding equal rights to be able to have sex ?

If above three groups have fought to obtain equal rights, do you really believe that the bisexuals, transsexuals and transgendered individuals are going to remain silent literally hiding behind the closet ? They too are very likely to come out and bring out new permutations of 21st CENTURY COUPLES and the different types of couples would continue to multiply with no end in sight. Demand for EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR LEGITIMIZING SEXUAL UNIONS AND MARRIAGE will extend to many other individuals including androgynous, asexual, bigender, genderqueer, intergender, pansexual, polysexual, third gendered, poly-friendly et.c.

Thanks to the slow but growing trend of OPEN MARRIAGE, you have again a new set of relationships among three or more individuals. MFM (Male-Female-Male), FMF (Female-Male-Female), FFM (Female-Female-Male), MMF (Male-Male-Female), FFF (Female-female-female), MMM (Male-Male-Male). Please note that OPEN MARRIAGE by default does not limit to three, it could be four or more which again will bring a new set of permutations in complex web of intimate relationships.

In such a complex bio-psycho-genetic-social mix, what MORAL VALUES DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT ABOVE NON-TRADITIONAL DEVIATED COUPLES ARE GOING TO INSTILL IN THEIR KIDS.

Despite us having the traditional family of a husband and wife and children, we have no short supply of problems relating to domestic violence between husband and wife, parents and children, child physical, sexual and emotional abuse et.c.

Now with above multiple models resulting from literal RAPE OF THE CONCEPT OF TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE, you cannot even imagine to what extent such problems would be compounded a hundred fold. WITHOUT DOUBT, THE CHILDREN WOULD BE THE HARDEST HIT AND WE ALL KNOW THAT - "CHILDREN ARE OUR FUTURE".

INCEST


(bumphlegman.com)


Swiss Consider Legalizing Incest
Not a bad idea, says Columbia prof's lawyer
(condensed version)
www.newser.com
By Rob Quinn, Newser Staff

Dec 16, 2010

(Newser) – The Swiss parliament has drafted a law that would allow parents to have sex with their children or siblings to have sex with each other, provided everybody involved is a consenting adult. "First-degree" incest is already legal in countries including France and Russia.

A lawyer for David Epstein, the Columbia University professor accused of having an incestuous relationship with his adult daughter, says that while people are right to be morally opposed to incest, the Swiss bill to tolerate "what goes on privately in bedrooms" has merit. "It's OK for homosexuals to do whatever they want in their own home," he tells ABC News. "How is this so different? We have to figure out why some behavior is tolerated and some is not."

(omss-culture.blogspot.com)

Islamic Perspective:

(ED NOTE:
We appeal to all Muslim brothers and sisters to hold steadfast to the rope of Islam by following the gems of Holy Quran and Hadith. Islam will continue to stand the test of time in terms of its benefits to humanity. Instead of pointing our fingers at others and imposing our values, we need to focus on the areas that we could improve in our personal lives in terms of interaction with our immediate family, relatives and friends.

Domestic violence and the outdated practice of physical abuse of children still looms its ugly head casting a black shadow over a large part of the Ummah.

Reflect carefully in your own life and ask yourself who has hurt you the most, in most cases it is your own loved ones. So the next time, you are really mad and upset at your loved one or family member or friend, ask yourself, what you could do to avoid escalating the interpersonal conflict and how you could use the gems of hadith and Holy Quran to bring greater peace and tranquility in not only your personal life but the lives of the loved ones around you.

As far as the extremist secularists who are in a FREE-FALL OF MORAL DEGRADATION, avoid the temptation of imposing your value system on them but definitely please pray for them.)

WHAT QURAN SAYS ABOUT INCEST:

The Quran gives specific rules regarding incest, which prohibit a man from marrying or having sexual relationships with:

* his father's wife (his mother, or stepmother, his mother-in-law, a woman from whom he has nursed,

* either parent's sister (aunt),

* his sister, his half sister, a woman who has nursed from the same woman as he, his sister-in-law (while still married to her sister),

* his niece (child of sibling),

*his daughter, his stepdaughter (if the marriage to her mother had been consummated), his daughter-in-law.

A Hadith also prohibits marriage to a woman and her parent's sister at the same time. The same applies for a woman with the male counterparts to the aforementioned. (Wikipedia)

(memegenerator.net)

WHAT IS GENETIC SEXUAL ATTRACTION (GSA)

Genetic sexual attraction (GSA) is a term that describes the phenomenon of sexual attraction between close relatives, such as siblings, first and second cousins or a parent and offspring, who first meet as adults.

The term GSA was first coined in the US in the late 1980s by Barbara Gonyo, the founder of Truth Seekers In Adoption, a Chicago-based support group for adoptees and their new-found relatives.

GSA is presumed to occur as a consequence of adoption, when the adopted children knowingly or unknowingly encounter biological relatives. Although this is a rare consequence of adoptive reunions, the large number of adoptive reunions in recent years means that a larger number of people (about half) are affected. If a sexual relationship is entered, it is known as incest, and may be distressing to both parties (see incest taboo).

GSA is rare between people raised together in early childhood due to a reverse sexual imprinting known as the Westermarck effect, which desensitizes them to later close sexual attraction; it is hypothesized that this effect evolved to prevent inbreeding.

Several factors may contribute to GSA. People commonly rank faces similar to their own as more attractive, trustworthy, etc. than average. Heredity produces substantial physical similarity between close relatives. However, Bereczkei (2004) attributes this in part to childhood imprinting on the opposite-sex parent. Shared interests and personality traits are commonly considered desirable in a mate. The heritability of these qualities is a matter of great debate; to whatever extent they are heritable, they will tend to cluster in close relatives. In cases of parent-child attraction, the parent may recognize traits of their sometime mate in the child. Such reunions typically produce complex emotions in all involved.

Germany
A brother and sister couple in Germany, the Stübings, fought their country's anti-incest laws. They grew up separately, met as adults, and have had four children. Their appeal was rejected in 2008, upholding Germany's anti-incest laws.

In the United States
Kathryn Harrison, literary author, published a memoir in the 90's regarding her 4 year incestuous relationship with her biological father, whom she had not seen for almost 20 years prior to beginning the relationship, titled "The Kiss".

(Condensed version from Wikipedia)

Romania Eyes Legalizing Consensual Incest, Wouldn't Be First Country in Europe
www.foxnews.com
(condensed version)

March 21, 2009
BUCHAREST, Romania —

Surprising as it may seem, incest is not always a crime in Europe. Three European Union nations — France, Spain and Portugal — do not prosecute consenting adults for incest, and Romania is considering following suit.

Laws exempting parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters from prosecution for incestuous acts if they are not forced upon adult family members are decades old in France, Spain and Portugal. In Romania, decriminalizing incest among consenting adults is being considered as part of a wide range of reforms to the country's criminal code.

One 27-year old chauffeur did not see any problem with the legal change."If brothers and sisters want to have fun, why should they be imprisoned? It is nobody's business what I do in my bedroom," Ionut Breazu of Cluj told the Associated Press.

Opposition also comes from the Romanian Orthodox Church, which counts some 85 percent of population among its worshippers and says incest "affects the moral and psychological health of human beings ... the sacred family institution, and public morality."

Irish homemaker Margaret Henry, 42, said society shouldn't be so concerned about it. "(Why are they) arresting people for what they do in their own homes, as long as they're adults and they're not hurting each other?" she asked.

ON THE QUESTION OF MARRIAGE
(condensed version)
neorepublica.com
07/09/09

"Since proponents of same sex marriage argue that a person should be free to marry whoever they want, the extension of the definition of marriage from the previously “socially assumed limits” of heterosexual couples means that other “socially assumed limits” can be and, in fact, should be disregarded. What this means is that to accept the freedom for anyone to marry anyone opens the door to incestuous relationships and polygamous relationships.

So here we get stuck: if we accept the premise that anyone has the right to marry anyone, then we are open to incestuous relationships; if we believe that some people should not be allowed to marry in our society, like close relatives, then it means that society has the right to restrict same-sex marriage if it so chooses.

That’s what it comes down to. If same-sex marriage proponents do not wish to open the Pandora’s Box of any type of marriage imaginable, then they must be open to some sort of government restriction, and if they are open to giving government the power to restrict marriage, then they open the door to restrict same-sex marriage. So the more consistent proponent of same-sex marriage that believes that government should not restrict the right of people to marry should take the full-blown libertarian plunge and say that “yes, we envision a society that permits incest, polygamy, incestuous polygamy, homosexual incestuous polygamy, etc.

What a possible pro-gay-incest marriage button will look like:

This is just food for thought. It’s an argument I came up with a while back but is shared by many other people across the political spectrum. Here’s an interesting article I just read. Sometimes this argument is called the “slippery slope” argument or reductio ad absurdum, but the reality is simple: either a person is free to choose any other consenting adult or a person can be restricted. It is no stretch to say that logically and legally this type of argument for any type of marriage can be used.

Here is where I need to clarify though: same-sex marriage itself will not lead to homosexual incestuous polygamous marriage but rather the explicit “freedom” to marry anyone will. So this is not inherently an argument about same-sex marriage, it is an argument about our willingness to let government decide the rules for marriage, e.g. rules possibly restricting gay marriage. So now the question is: do we want to live in a society where we can collectively choose to restrict some forms of marriage or not?"

Is Incest always wrong?
(condensed version)

If adult relatives consent, we should look past our revulsion
Jan 2, 2010

Ishmael N. Daro — CUP Opinions Bureau Chief

SASKATOON (CUP) — In early December, a professor at Columbia University in New York was charged with incest. David Epstein allegedly had a three-year sexual relationship with his daughter, and now faces up to four years in prison.

The relationship started when the daughter was over 18, and therefore an adult. From what little is known about this lurid affair, it appears to have been consensual. If consent is the cornerstone of sexual ethics, it’s hard to see why jail time is necessary.

....the law should stay out of regulating sexual morality. After all, if incest occurs between an adult and a minor there are already laws in place against pedophilia and sexual abuse. Two consenting adults, however, should be free to do whatever they like in the bedroom, even if their relation makes us squeamish.

The Criminal Code of Canada defines incest as: “Every one commits incest who, knowing that another person is by blood relationship his or her parent, child, brother, sister, grandparent or grandchild, as the case may be, has sexual intercourse with that person.”

There is nothing in the law about consent, coercion or violence. A person convicted of committing incest can receive up to 14 years in prison in Canada.

Around the world, half a dozen countries have no laws against consensual incest between adults including France, Spain and Russia. These countries are not suffering from moral collapse any more than Canada and the U.S.

Sometimes, certain sexual practices inspire such revulsion they bring the full force of the law upon those who take part in them. Interracial marriage was once seen as abhorrent, but today you would be hard-pressed to find any serious opposition to such a union. Homosexuality, too, used to inspire violent opposition — and arguably still does — but most people accept it as part of mainstream society.

The point isn't that incest is equally valid as those other examples, just that attitudes change over time. There is no telling what "perversions" we will find acceptable in the future and criminalizing consensual relationships seems to impose morality through the force of the state. Often, it's better to regulate such things in the larger culture and leave it out of the courts.

Nothing Wrong With Incest If Secular Worldview Is True
(condensed version)
LifeSiteNews.com
Apr 11, 2008

Commentary By Michael Baggot

April 11, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - I

In February 2007, the German brother-sister couple Patrick Stuebing and Susan Karolewski asked the Constitutional Court to overturn the ban on incest. After giving birth to four children with his sister, Stuebing freely opted for a vasectomy. With no threat of inflicting physical or emotional harm upon future offspring, are Stuebing and Karolewski now engaged in a perfectly healthy, loving relationship?

"The main problem is, of course, that the couple might produce unhealthy children. But if they don’t have children, then I see no reason why not, in this day and age. But then, I’m a scientist, not a moralist," stated Professor Roland Littlewood.

From a secular perspective, Littlewood’s moral assessment is unassailable. If, as the great neo-Darwinian narrative teaches, man is merely the accidental byproduct of blind, unguided natural processes, then there seems to be no reason for man to restrain his sexual desires. If there is no God, then there is no transcendent purpose for sexuality. Man is thus free to follow and satisfy his sexual urges as he sees fit.

Most proposals for the social and legal recognition of traditionally condemned sexual relationships, whether between members of the same sex or of the same family, base their advocacy in a secular lassie-faire sexual ethic. "Our body, our choice" runs the mentality.

The secularist’s endorsement of deviant sexual practices is perfectly consistent with their worldview. The question then is whether their secular worldview is actually true.

Unlike Professor Littlewood, most people, even if they haven’t had extensive philosophic or theological training, are revolted at the notion of same-sex unions, pedophilia, and incest. They have an intuitive sense of right and wrong, a "gut" sense that certain things just aren’t right.

Of course, this sense of right and wrong can become obscured through repeated vice or a permissive culture.

Nonetheless, both educated and uneducated, religious believers and non-believers, generally agree on the impropriety of certain sexual behavior.

The fact is that man’s intuitive sense of a moral law points towards a lawgiver. Theistic pro-lifers can point towards God as the author of the binding moral law. Further, they can explain sexuality as a gift from the Creator designed with a specific purpose. Honest secularists, on the other hand, realize that they have no basis for their moral revolt, for making any statements whatsoever about what should or should not be permitted.

A secularist can recognize moral truths and even live in accord with many of them. For instance, he can see that adultery, whether with partners inside or outside the family, betrays the spousal fidelity that gives the family its stability. Nonetheless, he cannot ultimately account for the source of morally binding norms.

Even when God’s voice is silenced in the public square and public educational system, it continues to sound in man’s conscience. Those who know Him need to help others identify the moral Lawgiver Who teaches man how to properly use his precious gift of sexuality for the purpose for which it was designed.

London Times Runs Article Promoting Incest

(condensed version)

LifeSiteNews.com
Thaddeus M. Baklinski and John Jalsevac

July 18, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com)
An article narrated by an anonymous woman who says she is "an academic," published in the London Times this week, favorably describes at length and in detail the woman’s incestuous relationship with her brother. The article is entitled "I had sex with my brother but I don’t feel guilty."

"Daniel is my brother," says the anonymous narrator, whose story was transcribed by journalist Joan McFadden, "but since I was 14 we’ve had a sexual relationship - and that’s not something that many people would feel comfortable with."

The narrator then relates, in increasingly explicit detail, the manner in which her and her brother’s close relationship gradually became sexual during their early teenage years. The author repeatedly expresses her belief that there was nothing wrong with the relationship, other than that society was unwilling to accept it.

She also suggests that incest should begin to be studied from an academic viewpoint and disassociated from the topic of sexual abuse. "As an academic I have a tendency to draw logical conclusions. I like to see a pattern and resolution, so it does pain me that what appears so lovely and natural to me would be regarded as abhorrent by most people. It’s not my subject, but I would be really interested to see a study on incest done on these terms, moving it away entirely from the concept of abuse."

She concludes by explaining that she and her brother have since ended their sexual relationship, with her brother having gotten married, and she herself having met another man with whom she is having a relationship. Nevertheless, she explains, "It’s hard knowing that the one person you love above everything is out of bounds. Perhaps worst of all is the fact that you can’t tell anyone, as his or her disgust would ruin everything."

The subject of incest has been appearing more frequently in the mainstream media in recent months, with its treatment becoming increasingly sympathetic.

Two recent court cases related to incest have been reported on by LifeSiteNews.com.

THE END

VOICE OF GLOBAL UMMAH

Volume 163, December 26, 2010
St. Louis, Missouri, USA

Editors: Mohamed & Rashida Ziauddin

In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent and the Most Merciful

EDITORIAL:

(Disclaimer:
While we strongly believe that the push for recognition of gay marriage is wrong, we believe that we have no right to impose our values on others. We condemn any harm done not only to above sexual minority but to other sexual minorities as well - bisexuals, transsexuals, transgendered et.c. While we continue to maintain our view that marriage is the sole domain between a man and a woman, we support civil unions for gays and lesbians)

When the geographical Tsunami occurred, there was loss of more than 165,000 lives and billions of dollars worth of property destroyed. Such catastrophes are obvious because of its immediate impact on the victims, their families and their immediate surroundings.

However what most of the world are not aware of, is the presence of another sinister SOCIAL TSUNAMI that is slowly but surely unraveling and is definitely NOT immediate or ABRUPT but literally continues at a snails pace but would eventually bring far more socially devastating destruction to mankind through the BREAKDOWN OF THE TRADITIONAL FAMILY that we now know of.

About a hundred years from now, anthropologists, historians, sociologists and other social scientists would be in a much better position to CONNECT THE DOTS and see a destructive pattern that had mushroomed during the early twenty first century that we currently may not be able to see.

In the previous issue we focused on the attack to the environment of the womb in which the human being is created. In this issue our focus is on the family in which the same new born infant is expected to be raised.

FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES, THE NUMBER OF NON-MARRIED HOUSEHOLDS EXCEEDED THAT OF MARRIED-HOUSEHOLDS.

Examples of three such social trends that would cripple the traditional family are the increased acceptance and legitimization of gay marriage, open marriage and incestuous marriage. The traditional family is like a body that has been attacked on one of its parts and is bleeding. Our focus on this issue is on gay marriage.

PART A
GAY MARRIAGE:

(thegaymarriageblog.com)

(guardian.co.uk)

(cabai.wordpress.com)

(cabai.wordpress.com)

(swifteconomics.com)

(whatsthet.com)

(therealbollywood.com)

(theglitinc.com)

(liberalconspiracy.org)

(neoskosmos.com)

(dailymail.co.uk)

(elsenal.blogspot.com)

(Ed Note:
The technological innovation has been progressing very rapidly since past few decades. The speed with which the human behavior (that has been anchored on the foundations of religion, culture and politics) is changing itself to cope with above super fast technological change has been very slow.

This has resulted in an increased disconnect between technological progress and corresponding change in human behavior. The "disconnect" is obvious in terms of people not realizing the devastating impact that certain technological innovations could cause in the long run.

In above context, we love Islam because many of the verses of Holy Quran and sayings of Prophet Mohamed (SAW) repeatedly emphasize on GAINING KNOWLEDGE, while at the same time, there is emphasis on self-discipline and clear guidelines on the progress of an individual's journey of life along with a clear destination. One could argue that Islam is against misuse of technological advancements that are detrimental to mankind.

Below condensed version of an article argues that it is wrong to assume that GAY COUPLES CANNOT PROCREATE. Please note, technology explained below is currently not in place to implement the model but is anticipated in future.

It is not clear to us as to why should we be making life much more complicated that it really is ?

Allah says in the Holy Quran:
"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things)"

Sexual Reproduction for Gay Couples:
(chromosomeschronicles.com)

Sexual Reproduction for Gay Couples:

"For a gay couple, one man needs to be Gay Couple designated as the father (the one who donates the sperm), and the other as the mother (the one who donates the egg). The “father” in this case can just donate sperm the normal way…no hardcore science is really involved. The “mother,” however, needs to employ the reprogramming and differentiation techniques". "Specifically, this man needs to donate skin cells. These cells must be reprogrammed into iPSCs, and the iPSCs must then be differentiated into eggs (this process is shown to the right). Once the eggs are created, they can be mixed with the sperm from the “father” to create an embryo from two men".

There are a few things to be aware of. First of all, the “mother” is also responsible for donating the mitochondrial DNA, which means that the man who opts to create the egg will also be donating the mitochondrial DNA. Another issue is that men carry an X and a Y chromosome. This means that there is a 50% chance that any gametes (sperm or egg) created from a man will have a Y chromosome. The egg must not have a Y chromosome because it might result in an embryo with two Y chromosomes, which would not survive. Finally, men still cannot carry children (I’m talking about biological men (XY), despite what you may have heard in the summer of 2008), so the embryos created from the two men will have to be implanted into a surrogate mother to deliver the baby".

Sexual Reproduction for Lesbian Couples:
(chromosomeschronicles.com)

"For lesbian couples, there are fewer lesbian Reproduction caveats to be aware of. Once again, one woman must be the “mother” by donating the egg while the other plays the role of the “father” by donating the sperm. The mother can donate the eggs just as a woman normally does through reproductive endocrinology in an in vitro fertilization setting. The “father” must utilize the reprogramming and differentiation techniques"....to produce the sperm (as summarized in the accompanying picture). Either member of this couple is capable of carrying the embryo (or embryos). If they opt to both carry embryos at the same time, I would go so far to say that the children can be considered fraternal twins.

There is one important caveat that the women must be aware of: they cannot have a son.

Women only carry XX chromosomes, and neither of them are capable of donating the Y chromosome necessary for male development.

For this reason, lesbian couples are only capable of having biological daughters".

PART B

INFORMATIVE ARTICLES RELATING TO MARRIAGE:

Traditional families are fast becoming a minority in our society

According to Baltimore Sun (Dec 18, 2010) , Census: Fewer than 10 percent of city households are nuclear families.....

New U.S. Census Bureau data indicate that her choice is becoming more common here. Baltimore and Washington are among a handful of U.S. localities where fewer than 10 percent of households are made up of married couples and their children. In the city, 8.6 percent of households are such nuclear families, compared to 23 percent statewide and nationwide.

The Decline of Marriage And Rise of New Families
By Pew Social Trends Staff

CHILDREN:

Children in America are growing up in a much more diverse set of living arrangements than they did a half century ago.

In 1960, nearly nine-in-ten children under age 18 resided with two married parents (87%); by 2008, that share had dropped to 64%.

Over the same period, the percentage of children born to unmarried women rose eightfold, from 5% to 41%. Far more children now live with divorced or never-married parents, and the number who live with cohabiting same-sex parents, while still relatively small, has grown over the past two decades.

Four in 10 say Marriage is Becoming Obsolete
Hope Yen, Associated Press
Nov 18, Washington

Is marriage becoming obsolete? As families gather for Thanksgiving this year, nearly one in three American children is living with a parent who is divorced, separated or never-married. More people are accepting the view that wedding bells aren't needed to have a family.

A study by the Pew Research Center, in association with Time magazine, highlights rapidly changing notions of the American family. And the Census Bureau, too, is planning to incorporate broader definitions of family when measuring poverty, a shift caused partly by recent jumps in unmarried couples living together.

About 29 percent of children under 18 now live with a parent or parents who are unwed or no longer married, a fivefold increase from 1960, according to the Pew report being released Thursday. Broken down further, about 15 percent have parents who are divorced or separated and 14 percent who were never married. Within those two groups, a sizable chunk — 6 percent — have parents who are live-in couples who opted to raise kids together without getting married.

Indeed, about 39 percent of Americans said marriage was becoming obsolete. And that sentiment follows U.S. census data released in September that showed marriages hit an all-time low of 52 percent for adults 18 and over. In 1978, just 28 percent believed marriage was becoming obsolete. When asked what constitutes a family, the vast majority of Americans agree that a married couple, with or without children, fits that description. But four of five surveyed pointed also to an unmarried, opposite-sex couple with children or a single parent. Three of 5 people said a same-sex couple with children was a family."Marriage is still very important in this country, but it doesn't dominate family life like it used to," said Andrew Cherlin, a professor of sociology and public policy at Johns Hopkins University. "Now there are several ways to have a successful family life, and more people accept them."

But economic factors, too, are playing a role. The Census Bureau recently reported that opposite-sex unmarried couples living together jumped 13 percent this year to 7.5 million. It was a sharp one-year increase that analysts largely attributed to people unwilling to make long-term marriage commitments in the face of persistent unemployment. Beginning next year, the Census Bureau will publish new, supplemental poverty figures that move away from the traditional concept of family as a husband and wife with two children. It will broaden the definition to include unmarried couples, such as same-sex partners, as well as foster children who are not related by blood or adoption.

(Ed Note:
It is really puzzling as to why there is no participation of Muslims in such an important social issue. Even Sikhs who are a much smaller minority than Muslims in the U.S have participated along with representatives from other denominations and faiths)

Historic ecumenical defense of marriage ignored by media
Chuck Colson
(lifesitenews.com)
Dec 15, 2010

"The letter (which you can read here) is entitled “The Protection of Marriage: A Shared Commitment.” The word “shared” isn’t mere rhetoric.

Among its signers are include leaders from various Christian traditions including Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Baptists, Evangelicals, Lutherans, and Pentecostals.

Unlike the Manhattan Declaration, this letter is not limited to Christians: Its signatories include other faiths, like Jewish and even Sikh leaders.

What the signers all share is the belief that marriage is the “permanent and faithful union of one man and one woman.” It is the “natural basis of the family” and “an institution fundamental to the well-being of all of society.” All of society, not just religious believers.

As Archbishop Timothy Dolan put it, “people of any faith or no faith at all can recognize that when the law defines marriage as between one man and one woman, it legally binds a mother and a father to each other and their children, reinforcing the foundational cell of human society.”

Thus, “the law of marriage is not about imposing the religion of anyone, but about protecting the common good of everyone.”

Today, traditional marriage is under attack by homosexual activists. Defenders of marriage are called intolerant by the media, human rights tribunals and the courts.

"What a double standard! The news media report everything about the gay-rights movement. But a statement historic in its broad sweep of religious leaders is utterly ignored. So, it’s up to us to spread the word. But these are times we live in. The media may be silent, but we must lovingly speak the truth to our neighbors".

Comments to above source posted by Raymond Peringer on Dec 16, 2010:

The institution of marriage between a man and a woman has been part of human culture for thousands of years. In Pagan Rome, a couple wanting to get married, signed an undertaking to have children. That leaves out same-sex “marriage.” Today, traditional marriage is under attack by homosexual activists. Defenders of marriage are called intolerant by the media, human rights tribunals and the courts.

Major religious leaders release statement supporting true marriage

John Jalsevac
(LifeSiteNews.com)

WASHINGTON, Dec. 7, 2010

Leaders of some of the largest religious communities in the United States have come together to express their commitment toward the protection of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

In an open letter released yesterday, entitled “The Protection of Marriage: A Shared Commitment,” leaders from Anglican, Baptist, Catholic, Evangelical, Jewish, Lutheran, Mormon, Orthodox, Pentecostal and Sikh communities in the United States affirmed the importance of preserving marriage’s unique meaning.

Read the complete text of the letter, and list of signers, here.

“The broad consensus reflected in this letter—across great religious divides—is clear: The law of marriage is not about imposing the religion of anyone, but about
protecting the common good of everyone,” said Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York, newly elected president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and one of the letter’s signers.

“People of any faith or no faith at all can recognize that when the law defines marriage as between one man and one woman, it legally binds a mother and a father to each other and their children, reinforcing the foundational cell of human society.”

Other signers include Leith Anderson, the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Archbishop Robert Duncan of the Anglican Church in North America, Manmohan Singh, the Secretary General of the World Sikh Council – America Region, and many others.

The letter states: “Marriage is the permanent and faithful union of one man and one woman. As such, marriage is the natural basis of the family. Marriage is an institution fundamental to the well-being of all of society, not just religious communities.”

“As religious leaders across different faith communities, we join together and affirm our shared commitment to promote and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman.”

The release of this letter happened the same morning that oral arguments on the Proposition 8 case began. In August, Judge Vaughn Walker had ruled California’s
Proposition 8 to be unconstitutional, based in part on the claim that defining marriage as between a man and a woman lacked any rational basis, and instead reflected nothing but religion-based hostility to homosexual persons. This ruling has been appealed and its hearing is scheduled for today, December 6.

“Today is the moment to stand for marriage and its unchangeable meaning. We hope this letter will encourage just that,” Archbishop Dolan said.

In France, Civil Unions Gain Favor Over Marriage

By SCOTT SAYARE and MAÏA DE LA BAUME
(lifesitenews.com)
December 15, 2010

PARIS — Some are divorced and disenchanted with marriage; others are young couples ideologically opposed to marriage, but eager to lighten their tax burdens. Many are lovers not quite ready for old-fashioned matrimony.

Whatever their reasons, and they vary widely, French couples are increasingly shunning traditional marriages and opting instead for civil unions, to the point that there are now two civil unions for every three marriages.

When France created its system of civil unions in 1999, it was heralded as a revolution in gay rights, a relationship almost like marriage, but not quite. No one, though, anticipated how many couples would make use of the new law. Nor was it predicted that by 2009, the overwhelming majority of civil unions would be between straight couples.

It remains unclear whether the idea of a civil union, called a pacte civil de solidarité, or PACS, has responded to a shift in social attitudes or caused one. But it has proved remarkably well suited to France and its particularities about marriage, divorce, religion and taxes — and it can be dissolved with just a registered letter.

As with traditional marriages, civil unions allow couples to file joint tax returns, exempt spouses from inheritance taxes, permit partners to share insurance policies, ease access to residency permits for foreigners and make partners responsible for each other’s debts. Concluding a civil union requires little more than a single appearance before a judicial official, and ending one is even easier.

It long ago became common here to speak of “getting PACSed” (se pacser, in French). More recently, wedding fairs have been renamed to include the PACS, department stores now offer PACS gift registries and travel agencies offer PACS honeymoon packages.

While the partnerships have exploded in popularity, marriage numbers have continued a long decline in France, as across Europe. Just 250,000 French couples married in 2009, with fewer than four marriages per 1,000 residents; in 1970, almost 400,000 French couples wed.

Germany, too, has seen a similar plunge in marriage rates. In 2009, there were just over four marriages per 1,000 residents compared with more than seven per 1,000 in 1970. In the United States, the current rate is 6.8 per 1,000 residents, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

France is not the only European nation to allow civil unions between straight couples, but in the few countries that do — Luxembourg, Andorra, the Netherlands — they are not as popular. In the Netherlands in 2009, for example, there was just one civil union for every eight marriages.

If current trends continue in France, new civil unions could soon outnumber marriages, as they already do in Paris’s youthful 11th Arrondissement.

The retreat from marriage — a recipe for disaster

Albert Mohler
(lifesitenews.com)
(condensed version)

Dec 13, 2010

Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

Dec. 13, 2010 (AlbertMohler.com) - If you were determined to consign a population to poverty and any number of social pathologies, how might you do it? If your design is to extend the effects of these pathologies and pains to successive generations, what might be your plan? The answer to both of these questions is clear. Just marginalize marriage.

Economists report that the wealth deficit of the unmarried as compared to the consistently married is as much as 75 percent. The unmarried are less healthy, less wealthy, and less stable in relationships as compared to married couples. And, to no one’s surprise, the ill effects of this condition are extended immediately to the children of unmarried unions and to generations to come.

In other words, it is hard to imagine a plot to bring harm and unhappiness to human lives that can compare, in social and economic terms, to the marginalization of marriage.

In terms of any religious dimension, this is as far as When Marriage Disappears takes us. Christians, of course, will have much to add to this picture. We know that marriage, though central to human society, was not given to humanity for purely sociological reasons. Marriage was given to mankind by our Creator, who gifted us with this covenantal institution for our health, our happiness, and for human flourishing. Beyond this, believers know that marriage is given to us for our holiness, as well.

Thus, for reasons that include all that we can learn from this report, and for many more that we know from the Scriptures and Christian wisdom, Christians know that the marginalization of marriage can only lead to unhappiness, unhealthiness, and the unraveling of human relationships.

We have no choice but to look this documentation squarely in the face. Are we not watching marriage disappear for many before our eyes?

Pro-Family Leader Laments Marriage Crisis in Spain

Comments: 1 Madrid, Spain, Nov 12, 2010 / 05:46 pm (CNA).-

The president of the Institute for Family Policy, Eduardo Hertfelder, has expressed disappointment in the state of marriage in Spain. The pro-family leader pointed out that so far in 2010, already more than 67,000 marriages have ended in separation and the number of marriages overall has declined. “The data on marital breakdowns confirms that the there is a marriage crisis in Spain. It demonstrates the need for our leaders to do something to prevent marital breakdowns – or at least mitigate them,” he said on Nov. 11. Hertfelder noted that during the first half of this year, 67,365 couples separated—3,000 more than during the same period in 2009. In addition, 93.4 percent of separations ended in divorce. “The seriousness of the situation” is that “despite the decline in the number of marriages ... the overall number of separations has not gone down, but up considerably. “This proves the problem is getting worse,” Hertfelder said.

GEMS FROM ISLAM:

* "The believers who show the most perfect Faith are those who have the best behaviour, and the best of you are those who are the best to their wives". [At-Tirmidhi].

* "Spend on them and you will be rewarded for what you spend on them". [Al-Bukhari and Muslim].

* "Whatever you spend seeking thereby the Pleasure of Allah, will have its reward, even the morsel which you put in the mouth of your wife". [Al-Bukhari and Muslim].

* "It is enough sin for a person to hold back the due of one whose provision is in his hand".

* A man once told the Prophet that he had many children but did not kiss any of them. The Prophet (Peace be Upon Him) replied: "Verily, God will only show mercy to those of His servants who do good to others." Imam Bukhari's Book of Muslim Morals and Manners

* As he carried his grandson on his shoulders, the Prophet was heard to say: "O God! I love him, so You love him too." Imam Bukhari's Book of Muslim Morals and Manners.

* "Verily, a man teaching his child manners is better than giving one bushel of grain in alms." (Muslim)

ON THE LIGHTER SIDE OF LIFE
(You can't afford to be serious all the time)

Thanks to Dr. Lewis for forwarding below e-mail.

Walmart Doctor

One day, in line at the company cafeteria, Joe says to Mike behind him, "My elbow hurts like hell. I guess I'd better see a doctor."

"Listen, you don't have to spend that kind of money," Mike replies

"There's a diagnostic computer down at WalMart. Just give it a urine sample and the computer will tell you what's wrong and what to do about it.

It takes ten seconds and costs ten dollars - A lot cheaper than a doctor."

So, Joe deposits a urine sample in a small jar and takes it to WalMart.

He deposits ten dollars and the computer lights up and asks for the urine sample.. He pours the sample into the slot and waits.

Ten seconds later, the computer ejects a printout:

"You have tennis elbow. Soak your arm in warm water and avoid heavy activity. It will improve in two weeks. Thank you for shopping @ Wal-Mart.."

That evening, while thinking how amazing this new technology was, Joe began wondering if the computer could be fooled.

He mixed some tap water, a stool sample from his dog, urine samples from his wife and daughter, and a sperm sample from himself for good measure.

Joe hurries back to Wal-Mart, eager to check the results.. He deposits ten dollars, pours in his concoction, and awaits the results .

The computer prints the following:


1. Your tap water is too hard. Get a water softener. (Aisle 9)
2. Your dog has ringworm. Bathe him with anti-fungal shampoo. (Aisle 7)
3. Your daughter has a cocaine habit. Get her into rehab.
4. Your wife is pregnant. Twins. They aren't yours. Get a lawyer.
5. If you don't stop playing with yourself, your elbow will never get better!

Thank you for shopping @ Walmart


THE END