- Joined
- Mar 11, 2013
- Messages
- 13,152
- Points
- 113
Judge Christopher Stevenson “said the man had not only broken the law, but the respect between husband and wife.”
However, no such respect actually exists within the framework of the Sharia, which is based on Qur’anic tenets that teach that men are superior to women (cf. Qur’an 4:34).
The migrant said confidently and correctly that “under Sharia Law it was essentially his wife’s religious legal duty to agree to have sex with him whenever he wanted it.” In his mind, Sharia is above all other legal systems; he apparently expected the Australian judge to agree to that. Imagine his surprise when he was sentenced.
Every Western country should establish a policy of zero tolerance against any and all cultural and religious practices that are in violation of their constitutions.
“Sudanese immigrant in Perth jailed after raping wife because of Sharia Law,” by Aidan Wondracz, Daily Mail Australia, August 23. 2020:
A Sudanese immigrant has been sentenced to four years jail after he used Sharia Law as an excuse to rape his wife.
The 40-year-old man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, forced himself onto his now ex-wife at their Perth home in 2012, the Western Australian District Court heard.
Prosecutor Joel Grinceri said the man believed he was entitled to sex under religious law, The West Australian reported.
‘He went on to say that under Sharia Law it was essentially his wife’s religious legal duty to agree to have sex with him whenever he wanted it.’
The man had also told police: ‘When I want to have sex, I’m going to have sex and she knows that.’
The court heard the man forced himself onto his then-wife while his children were also at home.
He pushed her onto the bed before he ‘pried’ apart her legs.
Judge Christopher Stevenson said the man had not only broken the law, but the respect between husband and wife.
‘The victim was obviously vulnerable by reason of her marriage to you and the place in which the offence occurred which was in your bedroom in the house … where she was entitled to feel safe and secure.’
The man was found guilty of one count of aggravated sexual penetration without consent and not guilty of making threats to kill, assault and deprivation of liberty…..
However, no such respect actually exists within the framework of the Sharia, which is based on Qur’anic tenets that teach that men are superior to women (cf. Qur’an 4:34).
The migrant said confidently and correctly that “under Sharia Law it was essentially his wife’s religious legal duty to agree to have sex with him whenever he wanted it.” In his mind, Sharia is above all other legal systems; he apparently expected the Australian judge to agree to that. Imagine his surprise when he was sentenced.
Every Western country should establish a policy of zero tolerance against any and all cultural and religious practices that are in violation of their constitutions.
“Sudanese immigrant in Perth jailed after raping wife because of Sharia Law,” by Aidan Wondracz, Daily Mail Australia, August 23. 2020:
A Sudanese immigrant has been sentenced to four years jail after he used Sharia Law as an excuse to rape his wife.
The 40-year-old man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, forced himself onto his now ex-wife at their Perth home in 2012, the Western Australian District Court heard.
Prosecutor Joel Grinceri said the man believed he was entitled to sex under religious law, The West Australian reported.
‘He went on to say that under Sharia Law it was essentially his wife’s religious legal duty to agree to have sex with him whenever he wanted it.’
The man had also told police: ‘When I want to have sex, I’m going to have sex and she knows that.’
The court heard the man forced himself onto his then-wife while his children were also at home.
He pushed her onto the bed before he ‘pried’ apart her legs.
Judge Christopher Stevenson said the man had not only broken the law, but the respect between husband and wife.
‘The victim was obviously vulnerable by reason of her marriage to you and the place in which the offence occurred which was in your bedroom in the house … where she was entitled to feel safe and secure.’
The man was found guilty of one count of aggravated sexual penetration without consent and not guilty of making threats to kill, assault and deprivation of liberty…..
