Texas and Washington have no idea. Apparently, how young is too young is all a matter of cultural perspective. In Saudi Arabia, girls are married off as young as eight — and should consider it a privilege — according to this report in the London Daily Mail:
Sheikh Abdul-Aziz Al Sheikh, the country’s grand mufti, told Al Hayat newspaper that those saying ten or 12-year-old girls are too young to marry are being ‘unfair’ to them. . .
Responding to a question about parents who force their underage daughters to marry, the mufti said: ‘We hear a lot about the marriage of underage girls in the media, and we should know that Islamic law has not brought injustice to women.’
The mufti said a good upbringing will make a girl capable of carrying out her duties as a wife and that those who say women should not marry before the age of 25 are following a ‘bad path’.
‘Our mothers and before them, our grandmothers, married when they were barely 12,’ said Al Sheikh, according to the Al-Hayat newspaper.
There are no statistics to show how many marriages involving children are performed in Saudi Arabia every year.
OK, so I’m not advocating marriage at age 8 or 10 or even 12. But I’m curious to know if any social scientists out there have any hard data on the long-term pros and cons of marriage at 8. Come on, I know you’re out there. Make my day! 
More at the Daily Mail.
{ 60 comments… read them below or add one }
Mohammed set the pattern, so what could possibly be wrong with it? He had nineteen wives, and married a nine-year-old when he was fifty-four. He consummated the marriage with Aisha, the nine-year-old, after her first menstruation. Pretty cool, huh? They do it way “better” than the FLDS, but I don’t see Texas CPS arresting any Muslims or rescuing any Muslim child brides. Am I missing something?
CPS doesn’t raid the muslim enclaves because CPS doesn’t want a lost world trade center on their hands.
If they do try it the lord will use the muslim’s to spank cps real hard!
Rich perverts with too much money. I guess money and power can buy anything expect morality
What kind of man would give his flesh and blood daughter to someone
to payoff a debt ? She didn’t make the poor choice to gamble or borrow,
I say the father should give his gluteus maximus for the rest of his life
and be treated as the poor little girls of Saudi Arabia. After reading this
story if my daughter in her life brings a boy, man of Saudi decent to my door
there wil be “death before dishonor”. Pigs, dogs, Saudi Men.
While brides as young a 10 were an exception, finacial arrangements tied into bridal arrangements were the rule, not the exception, in pretty much the whole world upto just a couple of centures ago. It probably is still the majority practice in underdeveloped sections of the world to arranage a wedding for a son or daughter and have money or property exchanged or debts cleared. Hopefully the father had consideration for his daughters feelings in these things, but often not.
In most of the world for most of history daughters got married as soon as they hit puberty (probably 12 to 15 in an undeveloped country). There was little reason for them not to because higher education didn’t exist.
We should perhaps not be so quick to judge countries that are just emerging into the modern world. This was where we were more recently that anybody would like to admit!
There is a very easy way to settle this. Get a 47yr old woman to marry a 8yr old boy in Saudi Arabia, then get this case to court.
Now pedophiles know which religion to convert to and justify their actions.
Anyone who defends the enslavement of the young is deserving harsh punishment.
Unfortunately, enlightenment of deeper darkness takes longer.
My goodness. Where are joey and thomas and kbp and txblogger to tell us that it’s all fine and dandy as long as they’re following religious beliefs? Where are the defenders of freedom to tell us that some 10 year olds are mature and ready for marriage and motherhood? Where are the constitutionalists to inform us that parents have a right to do whatever they please with their children without interference? Where are those who would tell us a marriage isn’t forced or coerced as long as there is no physical force or strident resistence?
Does anyone who reads here really think this is ok?
SKK:
“Where [is] …kbp…to tell us that it’s all fine and dandy as long as they’re following religious beliefs?”
Saved and added to the endless list of SKK’s inaccuracies.
I’ll patiently await for you to show us where I ever stated such, or anything that would excuse marriage to one younger than what has been allowed in any states within the past couple generations.
I’ll take your word for it. Must have had you confused with some other criminal sympathizer
So kbp, its interesting the way you framed your response. I take it you’re not a supporter of current laws, but you want to pick and choose from among the laws of the last couple generations. Well wouldn’t we all like to pick and choose which laws we’ll follow and which we’ll dismiss! I think there’s a name for societies organized that way.
So how young is too young for marriage or should we just assume parents will protect their little girls and make good decisions each and every time?
SKK; Ages being discussed here are definateley too young. Children dont begin to develop the ability to make independent moral decisions until age 12. Parents are better judges of when their girls are ready to marry than a large impersonal beurarcracy. Parents know their children, CPS knows only rules and laws and not people. As the video of Merrianne demonstrates, CPS lacks the capacity for compassion.
SKK,
My biggest complaints on the age of marriage are the sentences (level of felony), how a marriage is legal for some (with approval from a judge) is a high crime for others, and the assumptions that all young brides are “victims” who just do not realize it.
Kbp, fully with you.
To put things in perspective, sodomy used to be capital. People just need to have a sexual minority to persecute, it seems.
Thomas, I’m with you on CPS. I want to ask you though, –
—what are “independent moral decisions”? I remember I knew right from wrong at 7. Not as “knowing what will get me into trouble”, but in real moral sense — that doing certain things to others just sucks. Just wrong. It felt that way.
So your “don’t begin to develop until 12″ could be an overstatement… or maybe I didn’t get your meaning.
Independent moral decisions means having the means to make moral decisions wihout the guidance of others. Others may still influence your decisions but an independent moral capacity begins at age 12. Merrianne wason the cusp of moral independence at age 12.
So is the argument that parents always make safe decisions for their little girls and marriage age should not be legislated? Is there an age or level of maturity at which a girl can be said to make an informed choice about whether to marry and whethert to engage in a sexual relationship? Why should patents have any decision making authority in this area anyway?
Is it ok to violate the law if we disagree with the reasons behind it or if we disagree with the severity of the punishment? Violating the law in furtherance of one’s religious beliefs is all well and good so long as the offender takes the consequences of his offense. No man is a law unto himself – not in the U.S.
I trust the FLDS parents more than I trust CPS. CPS has shown very little compassion for the women and children of the FLDS. CPS has not been willing to adapt ro individual circumstances. CPS has made innocent children suffer by denying them contact with fathers who were accused of underage marriages where no forces or aggression is involved.
The constitution requires that laws must be religiously neutral. Laws that are passeed to attack one paticular group are unconstitutional. This is especially true of laws that were passed with the stated purpose of driving FLDS out of Texas.
The Law is a blunt instrument that too often fails to adjust for individual circumstances. I do not believe that the 15 year old from Dallas that we have previously discussed is in a bad situation. She has her mother and a cousin to help her with the duties of being a Mother. I do not believe the underage brides of the FLDS are in a bad situation. They have sister wives to help them with the duties of being a Mother.
Thomas why do you keep bringing up CPS? I asked about the law and age of consent. Can you answer the question? And should individuals in a society be able to ignore laws they don’t agree with?
The law is indeed a blunt instrument and the law doesn’t care if a particular 15 year old is in a good position or a bad position. Nor does the law care how many sister wives one has to help raise an underage wife’s baby. It is true that the law does not take into account individual circumstances (although sentencing often does). The law is what it is and I want to know why a certain group should be permitted to live outside the law.
“Why should patents have any decision making authority in [marriage age or level of maturity ...for sexual relationship of their child] anyway?”
That’s an interesting question.
How do I advoid bringing up the CPS? Every time I see the video of CPS taking Merrianne into captivity, I am reminded oof how little compassion CPS has for any of these women and children paticurly at the Fort Concho concentration camp. Those who criticize the FLDS love the Law. Those who support the FLDS criticize the law. Those who emphsize support of law frquently have a hidden agenda. SKK: I havent figured out what your agenda is.
Laws can be however blunt or fine depending on how many pages/volumes we allow for writing them down.
There could be different laws for minorities, I submit. There are downsides… so not sure if that’s warranted. Maybe it is.
Kbp:
”
“Why should patents have any decision making authority in [marriage age or level of maturity ...for sexual relationship of their child] anyway?”
That’s an interesting question.”
Because they have power de facto. The can sabotage a decision they don’t like, or at least make life hell for everyone.
Thomas:
Sorry– and thanks for your effort– but I still don’t get it.
having the means to make moral decisions wihout the guidance of others
What’s “making decisions”? I knew there was a “decision” — an “opinion”, that is — in my mind at age 7. It did’t take much heed of anyone’s guidance. Only I would seldom dare voice it, much less insist on it — in this sense, I couldn’t make a decision. So maybe in this latter sense? But how does that apply?…
Oops – my one-sided answer to kbp was uncharitable to parents. Let me add to it: Parents know and love their children.
(Amount and quality of this knowledge and love vary, obviously.)
Kbp – that question was designed to provoke deeper thought. Perhaps you understand – you hesitated before answering while others jumped right in (and apparently missed the paradox). So how do you answer the question- why would a parent be involved in their children’s choice to marry or a child’s choice to enter into a sexual relationship?
Why would they? Me, I’d rather ask, why wouldn’t they? The choice of partners does have a significant impact on life, and while the individual may find it annoying, parents’ advice is often valuable.
SKK:
“Why should patents have any decision making authority in [marriage age or level of maturity ...for sexual relationship of their child] anyway?”
The trick question!
The most important reason I see is the same one that leads me, and has for more than 40 years, to ask for my father’s advice;
…he cares more about the outcome of all decisions that may affect my life than he does about those that affect his.
There are none that I know of which care more for someone than their parents. Even if they were absent any rules to designate such, a parent knows they’re assigned responsibility for their child and that it carries with it unwritten authority of various levels which continue throughout the lifetime of that relationship.
Parents are “involved” in their kids’ choices about all kinds of things. They are involuntarily “involved” if a daughter has a child out of wedlock or in wedlock with a itinerant farm laborer who can’t support his family; if a son fathers a child out of wedlock or doesn’t have the skills or motivation to take care of his children. I have friends in their late fifties how are literally parenting two of their grand children because their son can’t or won’t take on that responsibility.
Parents feel pain when their children feel pain. We have an interest in what happens to our kids. Therefore, we should have some input into the choices they make. We can’t “control” them and wouldn’t try, but we can sure try to influence them. I don’t think we or they would have it any other way. And, I would say, that America would be much stronger if more parents took a more active role in their kids’ choices.
Finally, in the best of all worlds, children help their parents get through old age into the great beyond. The extent to which children can and will help depends on choices they’ve made. Again, parents have a very real interest in those choices.
Why is it not okay for a 12 year old to marry but they sure can have sex with many “boyfriends”. They marry–they are taken away..they have sex and the audience applauds them on their “individuality” and “expression of love”. I don’t agree with marriage so young but a lot of people think fornication is okay…even as young as 9..let’s just give them some “sex education”, tax paid “free condoms”, and a pamphlet from Planned Parenthood on how to procure a free “morning after pill” and it is all okay.
I’m not just talking about suggestions and advice from parents — I’m talking about giving parents the legal authority to consent for their children to enter into marriage or engage in a sexual relationship. That is what was suggested — let parents decide rather than CPS or state legislation, I think it was Joey who said that.
If a girl is mature and competent enough to consent to marriage and a sexual relationship, why then would a parent have any right to consent or withhold consent?
By arguing that it is the parent who shoud have that decision making authority, the assumption is built in that the girl is not competent or mature enough to make that kind of adult decision without her parents’ consent. If parental consent is necessary, the girl is too young to make the decision on her own and too young to marry.
Yes, kbp, it was a trick question.
Those who emphsize support of law frquently have a hidden agenda. SKK: I havent figured out what your agenda is.
Perhaps she makes her living as a discerner of the laws nuances, i.e. as a lawyer, which is analagous to the position of priest in Catholic theocracies of yester-year, or for modern-day example: mullah or rabbi.
If parental consent is necessary, the girl is too young to make the decision on her own and too young to marry.
The law disagrees with you (but you should know that). Girls as young as 13 in Texas can get married with the approval of a judge (but you knew that).
Why don’t you state your opinion or your agenda, SKK? What “should” or “should not” be as it relates to marriage is ultimately a personal matter. When the government starts to legislate our thoughts and feelings, our allegiances and loyalties (whether to our parents or to our church) is when we enter a state of totalitarianism.
Rigid enforcement of arbitrary rules concerning sex, procreation, and cohabitation (marriage) are doomed to fail as they are unworkable, make life miserable and turn society into yet another theocracy/communist-like hell-hole. Let the sub-societies and groups live as they please, with government existing merely as the enabler/arbiter.
skk
“If a girl is mature and competent enough to consent to marriage and a sexual relationship, why then would a parent have any right to consent or withhold consent?”
My 20 year old asked me for guidence!
and I instructed her according to my
beliefs, would you call that wrong
because I didn’t get government intervention?
Remember the government is made up of people
with all kinds of beliefs and backgrounds, why would I
want them to have ANYTHING to do with my family
decisions?
Solving paradoxes is good brain gymnastics.
Hopefully SKK’s agenda is nothing more sinister than that. Have a dispute, exercise the mind. Tease us a bit.
I would interpret SKK’s paradox thus:
If a girl is mature enough to be married, she’s mature enough to choose on her own. If she’s mature, let her decide, and no need to ask parents; if she is immature, they must say “no” — or be branded unfit parents — so why ask them at all?
It’s an entertaining one to solve.
How about this: if a girl is a physically mature enough to have sex, she’s physically mature enough to get married. The requesting permission part, whether from her parents or a judge, has more to do with resolving the matter of her custody and emancipation than it does with her mental maturity. A parent and a judge may deny her emancipation for reasons other than her mental maturity and thus the matter of mental maturity is not the key issue.
Joey— what could be those “reasons other than…”? Because her parents are not ready to see her married, at least not to the particular groom — is that what you mean?
SKK:
“…If a girl is mature and competent enough to consent to marriage and a sexual relationship, why then would a parent have any right to consent or withhold consent?
By arguing that it is the parent who shoud have that decision making authority, the assumption is built in that the girl is not competent or mature enough to make that kind of adult decision without her parents’ consent. If parental consent is necessary, the girl is too young to make the decision on her own and too young to marry.
Yes, kbp, it was a trick question.”
Harvey’s law is then the problem you are arguing against now!
While this may add to some of the reasoning behind Harvey’s law, the parents are the best candidates to seek input from when trying to determine IF that offspring is “competent enough to consent to marriage and a sexual relationship”, for few care more for those candidates than parents do.
The problem I see is Harvey just added too many qualifiers, too much red tape and terrible sentencing guidelines in his laws.
Alexei 01.20.09 at 12:05 pm
Joey— what could be those “reasons other than…”?
Because some parents tend to be possessive and smothering. They can’t lose their “baby.” Sometimes the girl has to literally run away to assert her independence. That is not right. Parents in our society could use a dose of realism and learn how to cut their kids loose when they become mature enough. Let them marry if they want even if they’re 15 or 16. It’s better than being a single mom at home or on the loose on drugs with CPS breathing down your necks.
Joey – I’m not sure what my opinion is yet. It is still developing. That’s why I’m asking all the questions. I’m trying to inspire discussion so I can understand different opinions. I do not always agree with the law, but I do understand that I have to obey the law or bear the consequences. If I were faced with the choice of obeying God or obeying the law, I hope I would have the strength and courage to obey God, and I hope I would have the will to do so without excuse or apology .. I would hope also that I would not run and hide and lie and cheat to avoid the consequences of my choices. What have I gained by taking my stand if I then barter my soul to avoid an earthly punishment?
“…I would hope also that I would not run and hide and lie and cheat to avoid the consequences of my choices. What have I gained by taking my stand if I then barter my soul to avoid an earthly punishment?”
Starts out a bit of a cheap shot.
run – All turned themselves in.
hide – We all know where they are.
lie – Questionable meanings, but short of lies I know of.
cheat – Not sure what this means other than it goes well with all other thrown out.
On “[w]hat have I gained by taking my stand”, you were addressing the laws of God, so he is who you wish to please unless your goal is to change the laws for others.
Well, for one thing, Texas law recognizes the parent’s authority. See Texas Family Code: CHAPTER 151. RIGHTS AND DUTIES IN PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP.
(a) A parent of a child has the following rights and duties:
. . . (6) the right to consent to the child’s marriage, . . .
Just in case anyone cares, my solutions to SKK’s paradox.
The paradox has the solution offered by kbp (= it is parents’ consent that certifies the child as mature), and I see two more solutions:
(a) the maturity to live in a marriage to a well-chosen partner may come sooner than the maturity to choose well over parents’ wishes.
(b) parents’ interests may deserve recognition even when they clash with those of their child. So if parents are adamantly against, let’s make the child wait till they reconsider, or till the child reaches majority. Harm to child may arise, but hopefully not a great deal of it, because “true love waits”.
(And besides, who is ever fully mature? Assumption that maturity is something clear-cut is an important part of the paradox. Take it away, and things get murky. )
Joey might have yet one more solution– unfortunately I didn’t get that one, maybe it’s different, or maybe it’s the same as one of those listed.
There’s also the shotgun marriage situation. Immature or not, the bride is deemed better off married.
That’s quite a few solutions now.
SKK: Yes the la shall not be ignored.In enforcing law enforcement should ask themselves if they are they doing more harm than good. The fifteen year old in Dallas has probably not suffered any real harm at the hands of her boyfriend. The FLDS girls in underage have probably not suffered any real harm. The wives and children of the men under indictment would suffer if their husbands and fathers were sent to prison.
The law must not be enforced in a lawless manner. First, the law must obey the law. Law enforcement either knew or should have known that tbe phone calls were hoaxes.
“Law enforcement either knew or should have known that tbe phone calls were hoaxes.”
Boy oh boy, don’t get me started!
Should the FLDS way of life be dismantled?
This is THE question.
Alexei
should your way of life be dismantled? this is a better question!