Toronto Police Services must fire their newest Muslim Chaplain right now or risk having a bigoted Islamic fundamentalist acting as advisor to their forces.
Here’s the background: the Toronto Police offer a chaplaincy program. That program is made up of volunteer chaplains from fifteen different faiths. Officially, the role of the chaplain is to provide spiritual support for officers and act as a liaison between police and their communities.
Chaplains don’t carry a gun; however, they are considered members of Toronto's police service. But, the force's newest Muslim chaplain is sparking outrage well outside Toronto's city limits.
Meet Musleh Khan: Born in Saudi Arabia, Khan now lectures in Toronto’s Muslim community on subjects like Islamic Law and marriage. And, on October 26th of this year, Khan was officially appointed Muslim Chaplain for The Toronto Police.
The moment that Khan was appointed, Canada’s mainstream media rushed to release glowing articles about the man and his high hopes in his new role. In those articles, Khan expressed excitement about being able to offer authentic explanations about Islam and the Islamic community to members of Toronto’s Police force.
But, one has to wonder if Khan’s self-professed authentic explanation of Islam is the sort of advice the men and women who enforce Canadian law should be heeding to.
Consider Khan’s thoughts on marriage. In a March 2013 webinar entitled ‘The Heart of the Home: The Rights and Responsibilities of a Wife’, Khan presented several slides including ones with these direct quotes. One reads:
(a woman) should ask her husband permission before leaving the home… she should take care to seek permission from her husband before going out of the home that he has provided her.
According to Khan, a woman must ask her husband for permission before leaving their home. Seriously. Perhaps Khan didn’t get the memo when he left Saudi Arabia that Canadian women don’t actually have to ask their husbands for permission to leave the house. Canadian women are free to come and go from their homes as they please. We’re also allowed to drive cars, go for a swim, interact freely with men, and — unlike Saudi Arabia — there aren’t any religious police who impose medieval dress codes on we women here in Canada.
But, according to Chaplain Khan, women’s subordination runs much deeper than permission slips to leave home.
Khan’s instruction on wifely obedience applies to conjugal acts, as well. According to Khan in that same lecture, a wife should not withhold sex from her husband unless she has a '"valid excuse"; to which Khan provides the examples of sickness or obligatory fasting.
Actually, no, Mr Khan. In Canada, a woman is not required to have sex with her husband (pending a doctor’s note). Canadian women are free to abstain from sex for whatever reason they please. And, unlike Saudi Arabia, where there is no law prohibiting marital rape — in Canada, we do have laws that say, even in marriage, a man cannot sexually assault a woman.
But, perhaps most reprehensibly, Khan — the newest Muslim chaplain for the Toronto Police — that man, is on record describing how the Muslim profit Mohammed’s marriage to a nine-year-old is somehow instructive.
In a Q&A session at a Mosque in Etobicoke, Ontario, Khan said that under certain circumstances, it is permissible to marry a 9-year-old girl. Khan knows what the legal age limits for marriage in Canada, he knows it’s eighteen years of age, or sixteen with parental consent — it’s not as though he doesn’t know.
Khan knows Canada’s law but says it’s not Canadian law, it’s not any country’s law — but Mohammed’s law that has the right idea.
Khan says puberty is the right time to get married (and, if that occurs for a girl when she’s nine years old, so be it) — and, don’t forget, according to Khan, married women are forbidden from withholding sex from their husbands.
So, if you follow Khan’s logic, you might end up breaking the law. You see, it’s actually illegal to have sex with anyone under the age of sixteen in Canada — and it doesn’t matter if she’s gone through puberty or not.
If you, like me are concerned that a man who holds these views is now advising Toronto’s police force and acting as a community liaison, join me in calling for his immediate dismissal.
Tell Toronto’s police service that you don’t want our men and women in blue taking cues from someone whose idea of the good society is incompatible with Canadian law.
Sign your name below and have your voice heard!
*Correction: Toronto Police Service Chaplains do receive and carry police issued badges.
Seriously, even if they get rid of him another one will take his place. This country is being over run with them, and 90+% live in fear of being labeled and unemployed for standing up to them..if not hauled into court over it.
I would have to read the chaplain's actual statements in context before commenting.
Among questions would be Exactly what are these: "under certain circumstances" ?
Did he actually encourage or say it was fine to ignore and break Canadian laws?
I did find a video of his entitled: "The Real You!" by Sh Musleh Khan. ... How to diagnose someone who may be possessed - Musleh Khan
It was a real hoot.
I guess the quoted post is showing words in a different order on your computer.. There is no context that will show the raping of a wife is ok.. or telling the wife she can't go outside the house.. or marry a 9y/o What CONTEXT do you need.. come on
This report from "The Rebel" raises my suspicions about this Muslim chaplain. Further investigation is clearly warranted. Perhaps the Toronto Police Department needs to make a change here.
But maryjane was right on target with his reminder that this one media report, in and of itself, does not provide enough evidence to close this case with any judgement for or against this Musleh Khan. I am here to back up maryjane on this point of order. "We" need Mr Khan's exact words and we need the full context of his statements. We need to make sure that what Musleh Khan said is not being misrepresented by The Rebel.
Here's part of that report from The Rebel's Faith Goldy. Click on her name at the top (using the link to The Rebel). Looks like kind of a "hottie". But let me get back to business:
quote
Khan’s instruction on wifely obedience applies to conjugal acts, as well. According to Khan in that same lecture, a wife should not withhold sex from her husband unless she has a '"valid excuse"; to which Khan provides the examples of sickness or obligatory fasting.
That is not in quotation marks. (Except for "valid excuse", and it leaves me uncertain about whether "valid excuse" is quoted directly from Mr Khan, or whether the quotation marks were used by The Rebel's Ms Goldy to imply that "valid excuse" is somewhat open to a reader's interpretation.)
This is not being reported as the exact words of Musleh Khan. This is The Rebel's Faith Goldy giving us her description of what Mr Khan said.
In a case of this magnitude, investigators like myself--and maryjane, I think it's fair to say--need to work from the exact words of Musleh Khan. Not how someone else--in this case, a "Ms Goldy" (think she'd mind if I teased her by addressing her as Ms Goldilocks?) described what he said.
According to "Faith"--can I be on a first-name basis with her now?--Mr Khan said that a wife should not withhold sex from her husband... now that can be taken in some different ways.
What if a wife were to make a habit of not having sexual relations with her husband? Days and weeks go by, and "no play for Mr Gray"--if you get my drift. (Bonus points for anyone who knows where that came from.)
Couldn't that be valid grounds for her husband to pursue a dissolution of the marriage? A divorce that would be recognized by Canadian law and also accepted as valid from an Islamic perspective by whatever Muslim community "Mr Gray" belongs to?
If that's where Musleh Khan was going with that statement--a statement that we are only getting second hand here, because Faith Goldy isn't quoting what he said; only describing what he said--what then?
As I already said at the very top of my brief, this is a case that warrants further investigation, but I am not going to be part of any rush to judgment that would expose my office to the risk of having been jerked around and substantially misled by a media venue (The Rebel) that may not be telling "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."
I need more. If this were my top priority, I would try to dig up more background material on this Musleh Khan, using Google (etc.). But it's not my top priority. So it has to wait. Maybe I will get back to this case. Maybe not. Probably not. Dem's da' breaks. There isn't enough time to pursue every case that comes up here.
There's no perfect justice.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-19-2017).]
Where is Newf to tell us about how the Catholic church...
Listen lemmings, no person of right ****ing mind condones ANY acts of rape or violence of a child. Rinse continues to defend the most heinous of actions by the most vile of peoples?
I am not mad at you Rinselberg, just questioning the reason for defense of even this by muslims? I understand that we should question for truths. I just don't get how an instant defense of a religion so disgusting to the planet excites you. Every single day there are multiple instances of allah impressing himself upon victims. From child rape, women's rights, to any number of horrid compliance's demanded by allah.
Sorry, to me immigrants should follow that nations laws over their own (religious or otherwise) laws. If Canada says its against the law, thats the law. If he dont like it let him go back to Saudi Arabia. Same goes for any that come after him. We have some cults (religions ?) that allow multiple wives and marriage to minor. I do think they allow them their mulitple wives, but draw the line at minors. Some of them are in jail.
This report from "The Rebel" raises my suspicions about this Muslim chaplain. Further investigation is clearly warranted. Perhaps the Toronto Police Department needs to make a change here.
...actually IF you took a little time a used google, they are other outlets carrying the story...but I see that you don't want to pursue this any further, scared you might find something you don't like?
Who could have possibly guessed that *you* would show up in this thread...
How much more like a Pavlovian dog can you get Ronald?
ding, ding, ding !
Well no more than you with your "civil attack"
Why can't he say his piece and what did he say that is any affront to anyone?
The man is a sympathiser but no more than others are for Catholic or Christian beliefs.
If Rinse is your self appointed social enemy you would do well to study him and encourage discussion with him.
There is no doubt in my mind that there will be open war with Islam at some point in our futures.More than 20 years but less than 50 and on for as long as an extermination takes. We won't be at the lead of this war but at the tail end.
I don't think it will take 20 years, more like 5-10.Europe has reached a tipping point and "they the people" are starting to rise up. Brexit to a large part is about immigration.
Here we aren't at that point yet, but a large portion of us are beyond fed up with them.
On the world stage, Trump is the real wildcard but I'm betting he won't be tolerating them the way odumber did.
And China already won't tolerate them.
Taken all together its a giant case of adapt or leave, and if you won't leave you will be removed.
Originally posted by pokeyfiero: The man is a sympathiser but no more than others are for Catholic or Christian beliefs.
.
Ah, there it is.. When has any Catholic or Christian said that under age sex is ok, rape is ok, treating your wife or any female like a slave is ok.. ??????? in your or your parents or grand parents parents life time?? We did not say.. oh preist diddling kids is ok and just let it go.. We did stand up and say that many jumped on that gravy train.. but in no way shape or form said it was ok.. yet, you seem to think.. A leader in that faith can basicly ok all this and it's just fine.. Even the preist that did diddle didn't have the nadds to try to claim what they did was ok,
Didn't cali just open the door for underage kids to sell their bodies.. but but, I'm sure it had nothing to do with lib's bending over backwards to aplease muslums.. basicly say'n See we see eye to eye come to our state.
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 01-19-2017).]
Originally posted by Mickey_Moose: ...actually IF you took a little time and used Google, they are other outlets carrying the story...but I see that you don't want to pursue this any further, scared you might find something you don't like?
Hello... what part of "If this were my top priority, I would try to dig up more background material on this Musleh Khan, using Google (etc.). But it's not my top priority..." did you not understand?
"If I took a little time..." If I took a little time to process every accusatory post against Muslims that shows up on this forum, I wouldn't have any time left to eat or sleep. MidEngineManiac posts at least one report like this almost every day of the year. I've cross-checked many such reports. Some are accurate. Others are a blend of truth and falsehoods. Still others are 100 percent fictional or "Fake News".
There was one not all that far back, that "MidEngine" posted about German authorities having discovered an underground jihad terror cell's arsenal of firearms and munitions that were concealed in a building, close to a mosque, in one of the major German cities. The report (from one of the innumerable second-rate media venues or blogs that are all about "the message") was accompanied by a photograph of enough assault rifles and other munitions to have equipped a company-sized infantry unit.
I did a Google Image Search on that photograph. It wasn't a photograph of what the authorities in Germany had discovered. It was a photograph that had been published several months before, that accompanied a report in the Wall Street Journal or some other well established online news site. It was a photograph of weapons that were seized by the U.S. Navy from a ship that they intercepted near the coast of Yemen.
That was a dumb-azzed response for Mickey_Moose to come up with. That I should have used Google. So, Mr Mickey_Moose, there were other media outlets that carried this story. Did any of these other media outlets address the questions or issues that I put forward when I posted my thoughts about what was published in The Rebel..? If there are other media outlets that duplicated the same text that appears in The Rebel, word for word--not uncommon--how would that fill in any of the "blanks" that I still have? After my careful consideration of this column from The Rebel.
quote
Originally posted by Tony Kania: I am not mad at you Rinselberg, just questioning the reason for defense of even this by muslims? I understand that we should question for truths. I just don't get how an instant defense of a religion so disgusting to the planet excites you. Every single day there are multiple instances of allah impressing himself upon victims. From child rape, women's rights, to any number of horrid compliance's demanded by allah.
This could be an interesting story to keep tabs on. I wonder if there will be (or already has been) some reaction on the part of the Toronto Police Department to what has been published under the name of "Faith Goldy" in The Rebel.
I said very clearly that this column in The Rebel has raised my suspicions about this Musleh Khan, who was born in Saudi Arabia and has now surfaced in this report from The Rebel.
If you think that I should also discard all of the skepticism that I expressed, about the accuracy of this column from The Rebel's Faith Goldy, then you are being online media report naive.
What's in The Rebel makes me suspicious--but only suspicious--about this Musleh Khan, who is described by The Rebel as the Toronto Police Department's newest Muslim chaplain.
If somehow I were to encounter some follow-up on this report in The Rebel, it could convert me from "suspicious about Musleh Khan" to "convinced about Musleh Khan".
What I have read so far, from The Rebel's Faith Goldy, makes me suspicious about Musleh Khan. I suspect that he may not be one of the Participant Muslims of the West.
If anyone would like to engage the reality (I think it's a reality) of the Participant Muslims of the West, a great way to start is with the YouTube video content that I posted here, less than a month ago. It's a 10-minute video segment. Follow the Yellow Brick Road by using this Internet browser page link: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/F...HTML/118776.html#p36
These are the Muslims that the MEM [MidEngineManiac] "channel” and its followers don't want you to know about.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-20-2017).]
Ah, there it is.. When has any Catholic or Christian said that under age sex is ok, rape is ok, treating your wife or any female like a slave is ok.. ??????? in your or your parents or grand parents parents life time?? We did not say.. oh preist diddling kids is ok and just let it go.. We did stand up and say that many jumped on that gravy train.. but in no way shape or form said it was ok.. yet, you seem to think.. A leader in that faith can basicly ok all this and it's just fine.. Even the preist that did diddle didn't have the nadds to try to claim what they did was ok,
Didn't cali just open the door for underage kids to sell their bodies.. but but, I'm sure it had nothing to do with lib's bending over backwards to aplease muslums.. basicly say'n See we see eye to eye come to our state.
What the **** are you babbling about now?
I am not comparing religions but the people that have their non objective opinions about them. These opinions that come from their point of view of the religion, not your point of view. Nor am I comparing any religion's capacity of evil. Catholicism in large has set back the modern age by 2000 years and has held civilization back with arcane laws since its inception. But like islam it has held the people together long enough for them to evolve intellectually. It is unfortunate Islam will not likely be given the same time to catch up.
You look at Catholic issues in the best possible light from a non extreme view. Assume for a minute that not everyone on the muslim side of the fence looks at their faith any differently.
This isn't about differing religions anyway. This is about an emerging culture and religion into a 21st century where laws,society and religion are not all one rule. Islam is centuries behind the times. If you can't have any patients then at least have an understanding. I'm thin on patience myself regarding the issue.
[This message has been edited by pokeyfiero (edited 01-19-2017).]
Many things in there would lead to a more harmonious married life. But some points are totally ridiculous...
Yes, sounds like a very long winded way of what is and in some cases was, traditional wedding vows here in this country and in most of Europe.
Groom: I,_man___, take thee,_woman____, to be my wedded Wife, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance; and thereto I plight thee my troth. Bride: I,_woman____, take thee,_man____, to be my wedded Husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, and to OBEY, till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance; and thereto I give thee my troth. h "To have and to hold" is right out of a very long term referring to contractual ownership and usage , called the habendum clause of a contract. It hasn't been very long ago in this country (USA) , that a wife, withholding marital 'favors' was grounds for divorce, and may even still be in some states.
Equally relevant, most married couples I know (myself included) have some expectation that their spouse will at least inform them of where they are going and why, when they leave the home, if only out of courtesy.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-20-2017).]
I am not comparing religions but the people that have their non objective opinions about them. These opinions that come from their point of view of the religion, not your point of view. Nor am I comparing any religion's capacity of evil. Catholicism in large has set back the modern age by 2000 years and has held civilization back with arcane laws since its inception. But like islam it has held the people together long enough for them to evolve intellectually. It is unfortunate Islam will not likely be given the same time to catch up.
You look at Catholic issues in the best possible light from a non extreme view. Assume for a minute that not everyone on the muslim side of the fence looks at their faith any differently.
This isn't about differing religions anyway. This is about an emerging culture and religion into a 21st century where laws,society and religion are not all one rule. Islam is centuries behind the times. If you can't have any patients then at least have an understanding. I'm thin on patience myself regarding the issue.
My opinion of islam was they are not all bad, was that way after 911 even with watching the local gas station and mini mart owners cheering on the towers failing.. Then a bomb went off 25 yards from me, blowing body parts all over boylston street.. And while we cleared out the runners and people watching, a 2nd one went off.. Every day I hear nothing but ringing in my ears , and that nightmare goes on like a movie in my mind over and over and over again.. Not being able to help a dieing child.hurts the most.. using my belt to help a person not bleed to death.. That day and the crap that has gone down since has molded my opinion..
[This message has been edited by E.Furgal (edited 01-20-2017).]
My opinion of islam was they are not all bad, was that way after 911 even with watching the local gas station and mini mart owners cheering on the towers failing.. Then a bomb went off 25 yards from me, blowing body parts all over boylston street.. And while we cleared out the runners and people watching, a 2nd one went off.. Every day I hear nothing but ringing in my ears , and that nightmare goes on like a movie in my mind over and over and over again.. Not being able to help a dieing child.hurts the most.. using my belt to help a person not bleed to death.. That day and the crap that has gone down since has molded my opinion..
I used to be the same way, some good some bad apples....years of dealing with them taught me VERY differently.
(to use unicorn terminology the libs understand)
The entire middle east is a culture of bullies <yeh, I used that word > and if you are dealing with them, get ready to be pushed around, bullied, harrased, threatened and assaulted until they get what they want and/or feel entitled to.
There are ONLY 3 options...get the hell out of there and never deal with them again (not very realistic). Give them what they want--anything--just to make them go away (yeh, like THAT'S gonna happen) or...(and I like this one) get meaner than they are and out-bully them.
I actually like the 4th option, ship 'em all back and turn the entire region into a glass parking lot, but I don't happen to have launch codes handy. <DOH >
I really am at a zero-tolerance point with 'em, and screw it if that's racist or un-PC or whatever label somebody wants to slap on the attitude.
Come to think of it ...they have a lot in common with BLM, Feminazi's, and libs in general. HOW many boats can we get headed towards that future parking lot ??
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 01-20-2017).]
Many things in there would lead to a more harmonious married life. But some points are totally ridiculous...
Obviously, many haven't bothered to look at this... Here's some direct quotes so nobody gets confused...
Of course, some Muslims will completely ignore or go to extremes on some 'commandments'.
6. duties of the wife 2. A halal relationship with her husband. The wife should make herself available to her husband, after marriage has taken place and he has given the mahr. She should not withhold this right from her husband without a valid excuse, e.g. Sickness, obligatory fasting etc. If she refuses without a valid reason then she has committed a major sin. This is because one of the wisdoms of marriage is to prevent zina/loose morals by allowing this relationship.
Most guys here don't expect a doctor's note from their wife...
8. duties of the wife 4. Ask her husband permission before leaving the home. She should take care to seek permission from her husband before going out of the home that he has provided her.
This is a little different than saying "I'm going shopping honey..."
7. Duties of the husband 4. Treat his wives fairly and equally. If the husband has more than one wife, he needs to do his best to treat them all fairly.
11. rights of the husband 1. Obedience and Serving. Husband has the right to command, protect and take care of his wife. They also look after their wives financially, so it is reasonable to expect their wives to be obedient to them. Serving does not mean slavery!
It seems in cases where he is treating his wife as a slave, she has no recourse...
12. Rights of the husband 2. A halal relationship with his wife. The wife should make herself available to her husband, after marriage has taken place and he has given the mahr. Wife should not withhold this right from her husband especially if she took the mahr. Abu Hurairah reported that the Prophet (SAW) said: “If a man calls on his wife to his bed, and she did not come so that he slept feeling angry with her, the angels will curse her till morning” (Al-Bukhari, Muslim).
Yup, it's a major sin if she doesn't feel like fooling around.
15. rights of the husband 5. Love, kindness and respect. The wife is expected to treat her husband in a good manner and seek his pleasure, in the same way he is expected to treat her well.
We seen written reports of Muslim men who take their rights very seriously (marital rape) - more than their duties.
I dated a divorced Egyptian Muslim woman for 5 years. There was a reason she divorced him. They were moderates, (she didn't wear headscarf except in mosque). He was a professor at the University of Calgary but even he had some extreme views and treated her like he 'owned' her.
[This message has been edited by fierosound (edited 01-20-2017).]
More about Musleh Khan, still associated (to the best of my knowledge) with the Toronto Police Department as a chaplain, and one of 19 chaplains that are accredited as such by the Toronto Police Department.
In his presentation on the Rights and Responsibilities of a Muslim Wife, published on January 26, 2015, Musleh Khan said:
quote
The wife should make herself available to her husband, after marriage has taken place and he has given the mahr. She should not withhold this right from her husband without a valid excuse; e.g., Sickness, obligatory fasting; etc. If she refuses without a valid reason then she has committed a major sin. This is because one of the wisdoms of marriage is to prevent zina/loose morals by allowing this relationship.
He did not say that the wife is obliged to validate her excuse with a note from her doctor. That is an embellishment that was added in the recent OpEd-style column from The Rebel's Faith Goldy, which is where this Pennock's thread originally started; but it's not part of this presentation from Musleh Khan.
What if there are some occasions when the wife just doesn't feel like it? Who's to say that a Muslim husband and wife cannot mutually agree to regard this as a "valid excuse"..? There's nothing in Musleh Khan's presentation that excludes this "Western-ized" reading of his strictures here, on what constitutes a proper Islamic relationship between a husband and wife.
Musleh Khan also said this:
quote
The wife should not go out of the house without first seeking her husband’s permission/approval.
Hold that thought for a moment.
In the other half of the same presentation, on the Rights and Responsibilities of a Muslim Husband, also published on January 26, 2015, Musleh Khan revisited the wife going out of the house "thing". He said this:
quote
[It is the husband's right to] Give permission for wife to go out of house. The wife should not go out of the house without first seeking her husband’s permission/approval. This is an important part of being obedient to the husband. Not an opportunity for dictatorship, dominance or control in the marriage..! Husband should be reasonable in this matter.
Did you read that? All of it, including the two sentences at the end of it? He even used an exclamation point (!)
I see nothing in these words that excludes the possibility of a Muslim husband and wife understanding this in the the same "Western-ized" way as Joe and Jill Smith of Anytown, USA (or Canada). The wife doesn't have to ask for permission every time she wants to go out of the house for a routine errand, such as grocery shopping; or for getting her hair done at a stylist salon, or shuttling the children to/from school, soccer league; etc.
She doesn't have to ask permission for a casual visit with the wife next door, or to spend part of the day downtown, including a cappuccino with friends at Starbucks, while the husband is occupied with husbanding.
There's nothing in this written presentation from Musleh Khan that excludes the possibility of a Muslim husband and wife living the same "Western-ized" kind of life as Joe and Jill Smith, if they both want to have it that way.
What if the Muslim husband doesn't want to be so reasonable? Or if the Muslim wife wants even more freedoms than Joe Smith willingly grants to Jill Smith?
I think in such cases, the fault lies with the husband, or the wife--but not with Musleh Khan.
Here's a report from Canada's CBC News, from November 6 of last year:
quote
Police spokesperson Meaghan Gray told CBC News that Musleh Khan, who was recently appointed to Toronto police chaplain, met with Toronto police Chief Mark Saunders, and “would like an opportunity to be heard by members of the Toronto Police Service.” She added, “We will be facilitating that opportunity. In the meantime, he continues as a volunteer chaplain.”
Musleh Khan came under fire following controversial statements on women’s rights. As part of his activity for Pure Matrimony, Musleh Khan held in March 2013 a webinar entitled ‘The Heart of The Home: The Rights And Responsibilities of A Wife’.
Musleh Khan sat down for a discussion with Chief Saunders, just two days before this CBC News report. You can read the rest of this from CBC News online: http://en.cijnews.com/?p=55318
One day before that report, there was this, from 24 Hours Toronto:
quote
The Toronto Police Service’s new Muslim chaplain, Musleh Khan, who has come under fire for his seemingly misogynistic views on women and marriage, met with Chief Mark Saunders on Friday, but what was discussed and the chief’s takeaway from the chat is still unknown.
“(Khan) would like an opportunity to be heard by members of the Toronto Police Service,” police spokesman Meaghan Gray said Saturday. “We will be facilitating that opportunity. In the meantime, he continues as a volunteer chaplain for the Toronto Police Service.”
[Chief] Saunders told the [Toronto] Sun on Friday, before the meeting, [that] he would give Khan a chance to explain himself, before passing judgment [on] whether the views on the [Musleh Khan's marriage] webinar were misguided, or simply misunderstood.
“What I want to do is to sift through [this] and find out exactly what’s going on,” Saunders said. “I know that there have been some issues with translation from Arabic to English.”
On November 3--just before those two reports--Farzana Hassan, a Muslim woman, author, social activist and musician, with a doctorate in Education, used the OpEd page of the Toronto Sun to characterize Musleh Khan's ideas about marital and gender relationships for Muslims as "troubling": http://www.torontosun.com/2...ains-views-troubling
On the same day (November 3), Huffington Post Canada ran a column from Dr. Junaid Jahangir, under the banner of "Toronto Police Chaplain's Sexist Views Don't Define My Islam". Here's a little "teaser" that may (or may not) whet your appetite for more:
quote
Khan has expressed that wives should be obedient to their husbands and seek permission before leaving their homes. He also asserts that it would be a major sin to refuse sex to husbands without a proper excuse such as sickness or obligatory fasting. He believes that it is the nature of men to demand sex more than women.
Had Khan studied the Qur'an based upon tadabbur (reflection) and aql (reason), he would not have fettered the meaning of the texts with patriarchy. Indeed, the idea of seeking permission from husbands before leaving home and the notion of greater sexual desires of men are extraneous to the Qur'an. Such viewpoints can be found in medieval legal manuals, but Muslims are not bound by the opinions of fallible scholars who shaped classical jurisprudence.
Dr. Junaid Jahangir is an Assistant Professor of Economics at MacEwan University. He is inspired by the elder Muslim mystics. With Dr. Hussein Abdul Latif, he has co-authored the forthcoming book "Islamic law and Muslim same-sex unions." http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/junaid-jahangir/
On November 9, the Toronto Star published some letters from its readers about Musleh Khan. Six letters. Here's my take:
Muslim, female. Thumbs down on Musleh Khan. (Hey, that rhymes.)
Maybe a good time for some of you to re-read 1 Timothy 2:9-15. or maybe Ezekiel 16:7-14 and perhaps 1 Corinthians 7:3-5.
For these passages in the Jewish and Christian bibles also proclaim that a young girl is old enough for marriage once she hits puberty, and that a wife's body is not her own, but belongs to here husband, and she should be silent and obey men.
Maybe a good time for some of you to re-read 1 Timothy 2:9-15. or maybe Ezekiel 16:7-14 and perhaps 1 Corinthians 7:3-5.
For these passages in the Jewish and Christian bibles also proclaim that a young girl is old enough for marriage once she hits puberty, and that a wife's body is not her own, but belongs to here husband, and she should be silent and obey men.
Difference is there, bight light.. Both followers of both faiths have evolved since the time of that writing. and DON'T still pust those ideals , nor do they still practice them.. Try harder next time, your light is fading away
Originally posted by E.Furgal: Difference is there, bight light.. Both followers of both faiths have evolved since the time of that writing. and DON'T still pust those ideals , nor do they still practice them.. Try harder next time, your light is fading away
Some still do, in all the faiths of Abraham. There is no difference. The only real difference is that you think laws Christians make under these principles are OK, because they're Christian and probably white. If they were brown and Muslim, you'd have a massive hissy fit, just like you keep doing all over the threads in this forum.
Trump's lawyer even used the 1 Corinthians reference as evidence that one cannot rape his wife. So don't presume to tell me that people don't still follow those ideals when they very well do. Your orange idol who has managed to get himself into the most powerful office in the country, believes this nonsense and so do many of his supporters, especially the hard right evangelical ones.
There's nothing in this written presentation from Musleh Khan that excludes the possibility of a Muslim husband and wife living the same "Western-ized" kind of life as Joe and Jill Smith, if they both want to have it that way.
What if the Muslim husband doesn't want to be so reasonable? Or if the Muslim wife wants even more freedoms than Joe Smith willingly grants to Jill Smith?
I think in such cases, the fault lies with the husband, or the wife--but not with Musleh Khan.
I agree completely with you. I'm sure moderate Muslims are the majority in North America. Because IF they are both reasonable, it works. But what if one or the other is not. That happens with non-Muslims too. It may be solved with counseling or divorce.
If a Muslim husband doesn't want to be reasonable at all, she could try to get a divorce. A man can divorce his wife on any pretext. Women, on the other hand, can obtain divorce only under extreme circumstances. http://www.foxnews.com/worl...gh-sharia-court.html
Fundamental Islam (as opposed to "moderates") seems to be a creeping evil spreading over the world. Bring in 10's of thousands of single men with no education, job, hope or morals - and lock up your daughters? Britain/Germany are good examples of what they've imported. Trump is trying to prevent that.
[This message has been edited by fierosound (edited 01-22-2017).]
This discussion (I think) has at least one subtext, and that is how to evaluate the quality and the reliability of the "opening shot" that was used to start this discussion: the online media report from The Rebel's Faith Goldy. http://www.therebel.media/fire_the_bigot
Here's an excerpt from that report--the part of the report that inspired the Topic or thread title from our original poster (Mickey_Moose).
quote
But, perhaps most reprehensibly, Khan — the newest Muslim chaplain for the Toronto Police — that man, is on record describing how the Muslim profit Mohammed’s marriage to a nine-year-old is somehow instructive.
In a Q&A session at a Mosque in Etobicoke, Ontario, Khan said that under certain circumstances, it is permissible to marry a 9-year-old girl. Khan knows what the legal age limits for marriage in Canada, he knows it’s eighteen years of age, or sixteen with parental consent — it’s not as though he doesn’t know.
Khan knows Canada’s law but says it’s not Canadian law, it’s not any country’s law — but Mohammed’s law that has the right idea.
Khan says puberty is the right time to get married (and, if that occurs for a girl when she’s nine years old, so be it) — and, don’t forget, according to Khan, married women are forbidden from withholding sex from their husbands.
Hold on to that thought for a moment.
Let me queue you (if you like) to the exact moment in The Rebel's YouTube video when Musleh Khan engages the permissible age for girls to marry.
Did Musleh Khan ever say, in clear, unambiguous Anglo-Saxon (English), that it is "OK to marry a 9-year old"..? Not that I see. Not in this video.
Did Khan say that Islamic law or guidance should take precedence, for Canadian Muslims, over and above Canadian law, about the permissible age for a woman to be married? Not that I see. Not in this video.
Did Khan say that it is OK for a Muslim in Canada to marry a 9-year old girl..? Not that I see. Not in this video.
Did Khan say anything in this video to suggest that he is actively pushing or lobbying anyone to have Canadian laws changed so that a girl in Canada can be legally married at the age of 9, or at the onset of puberty? Not that I see. Not in this video.
Was this YouTube video from The Rebel--the part where Musleh Khan was speaking--cut off abruptly, in order to conceal whatever he said next? Maybe.
What's your "take"..? I thought it was cut off abruptly. It makes me suspicious. Did he continue with this topic, or move on to another topic?
How could someone like you or me get "Closer to Truth" on this point?
There's a Musleh Khan channel on YouTube, but he has 271 videos. So it looks to be something of a "chore" to sort through all that and zero in on the same presentation that is being held front and center here by The Rebel. Or to sort through all that to see if he has made additional statements that would more clearly define his thinking about the permissible age for girls to be married--in general, and more particularly in Canada.
Should Musleh Khan be removed from his association as a chaplain with the Toronto Police Department?
If I were going to make that decision, or have an input (advice) for whomever could make that decision, I would like to know more about how Khan has performed in his chaplain's "gig", since his first day with Toronto PD, on October 28, 2016. I would like to be able to consider that kind of information, and examine it, side by side with any and all other information about Musleh Khan, before offering my opinion on whether he should be retained as a police department chaplain, or removed from that association.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-22-2017).]
This must be what Julio Jones feels like when he scores a game-winning touchdown. This must be what rinselberg feels like when he takes down another misleading media report.
This must be what Julio Jones feels like when he scores a game-winning touchdown. This must be what rinselberg feels like when he takes down another misleading media report.
You are so in love with islam, why not move to middle east so you can enjoy it's full glory.. Without those pesky western laws and cultures to get in your way.
> and if you are dealing with them, get ready to be pushed around, bullied, harrased, threatened and assaulted until they get what they want and/or feel entitled to.
>
...they have a lot in common with BLM, Feminazi's, and libs in general. HOW many boats can we get headed towards that future parking lot ??
