GTA’s secret world of polygamy
Posted on 24 May 2008 by Jack
There were no pleasantries, there was no small talk. Safa Rigby had expected to hear her husband’s voice when the phone rang one morning. Instead, the caller didn’t even bother to say hello.
“You think you know your husband. You don’t know him at all,” said the man, a friend of her husband’s. “His car is parked outside my house right now. He is with my ex-wife. They just got married last week,” the man said.
It took a minute for the news to sink in. Then she called her husband of 14 years, demanding to know if what she had just been told was true – that while she spent a year in Egypt raising their four children in a more Islamic environment, he had used it as an opportunity to marry not just one, but two other women in Toronto.
“Yes, I’m married,” he said, quashing all her dreams of their future together.
He told her he was married in a small ceremony 20 days earlier, officiated by Aly Hindy, a well-known Toronto imam, at his Scarborough mosque.
“I cried for six days straight. Lost my appetite, ignored the kids, even had to start taking antidepressants,” said Rigby, 35. “What I couldn’t understand was how such a thing could happen in Toronto, my hometown, where polygamy is supposed to be illegal.”
It was easy. He simply found an imam willing to break a Canadian law, in exchange for upholding an Islamic one.
“Polygamy is happening in Toronto; it’s not common, but it’s happening,” said Hindy, imam at Salahuddin Islamic Centre.
Hindy, hardly a stranger to controversy, is well known for his friendship with the family of Omar Khadr, the young Canadian detainee at Guantanamo Bay, and his outspoken views on the implementation of Islamic law. In the past five years, Hindy said he has officiated or “blessed” more than 30 polygamous marriages; the most recent was two months ago. Even some imams in the GTA have second wives, he added.
“This is in our religion and nobody can force us to do anything against our religion,” he said. “If the laws of the country conflict with Islamic law, if one goes against the other, then I am going to follow Islamic law, simple as that.”
Popularity: 19% [?]
May 24th, 2008 at 9:38 am
I wrote about this today.
Where is the McGuinty government in this one? It’s somewhat different from the Bountiful situation in that some of these Muslim women have not agreed to polygamy. So you would think it would be easier to prosecute what is happening in Toronto than in BC where the women say this is what they want.
Hey, really cool edit feature, BTW!!!
May 24th, 2008 at 10:00 am
This is only a ’secret’ to multi-culti folks who believe all cultures are equal and don’t really pay attention to the details. I thought this quote said it all, really:
“This is in our religion and nobody can force us to do anything against our religion,” he said. “If the laws of the country conflict with Islamic law, if one goes against the other, then I am going to follow Islamic law, simple as that.”
Nice to see the Toronto Star finally looking into these types of issues. When I first start reading the piece, I assumed it was something from the National Post. I was shocked to see it was from The Star. What I have never understood is how Canadian women put up with Islamic ways, maybe a backlash is finally starting to form? I hope so.
And I agree with Joanne about the edit feature. Glad you were able to get your site up and running again, Jack. I felt sympathy for you as I am sure it was a nightmare trying to fix.
May 24th, 2008 at 10:31 am
“I am sure it was a nightmare trying to fix.”
You got that one right but it was a good exercise in learning how to set up Wordpress so the effort hasn’t been wasted. People will note a few pictures missing from the entries here and there.
In time I’ll get that cleaned up also.
May 24th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Credit to the Toronto (RED) Star for covering Islamic Polygamy !
Now I wonder how many millions of dollars of tax payers money is
going out the door to cover Islamic Polygamy, and will Dalton
Mcshiftys Govt look into to this.
May 24th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Welcome back, Jack.
From The Star article:
“This is in our religion and nobody can force us to do anything against our religion,” he said. “If the laws of the country conflict with Islamic law, if one goes against the other, then I am going to follow Islamic law, simple as that.”
I agree with Jwl. That reply is an alarm bell that should be heeded by both the provincial AND the federal government. Maybe it’s time for a “reasonable accommodations” debate “à la Québec” in Ontario as well, although the reactions and interpretations are still being formulated.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080524.quebec24/BNStory/National/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20080524.quebec24
“QUEBEC CITY — Premier Jean Charest is taking to the airwaves and buying full-page newspaper ads to defend himself against opposition claims that he’s not adequately protecting Quebec’s identity.
Mr. Charest immediately distanced himself from one of the major conclusions in this week’s controversial Bouchard-Taylor commission report on the accommodation of immigrants in Quebec.
It called for religious and cultural reciprocity between francophone Quebeckers and immigrants as a means to resolve the so-called “accommodation crisis.”
The ad features a picture of Mr. Charest signing a document stating that “when one chooses Quebec, one also chooses Quebeckers and their values,” referring to the need for immigrants to do their part to integrate into Quebec society.”
I especially appreciate this part: “when one chooses Quebec, one also chooses Quebeckers and their values” which i would of course extend to all of Canada.
May 24th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Sorry, but I don’t quite understand how the “edit function” works, so I may have posted twice. My apologies.
May 24th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
It’s OK Gabby. That’s an easy fix. Duplicate entry gone.
May 24th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Gabby I agree with you and hopefully McGuinty took some lessons from Charest during thier recent visit.
I’m tired of being Hotel Canada. We value our history which includes the Reformed Christian religion which allowed for the separation of church and state along with the development of capitalism and the rights of individuals versus the collective. Without those cornerstones to our society the Third World would not be lining up to get into our country. Let’s make sure immigrants adapt to us not us adapt to the ways of the hell holes these people came from.
In short, keep our immigrants and deport the multi-cultis like Bouchard and Taylor.
May 24th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
“… deport the multi-cultis like Bouchard and Taylor”
I’m not sure the two deserve that. They had to tread a fine line between outright racism, which I’m sure we all oppose, and the rampant freewheeling multiculturalism in which new arrivals simply make a geographical move but expect to live exactly in the same way they used to do back in the old country.
When we arrived here from the old country, we (particularly my parents, since we children adapted very quickly) had to make adjustments, and without the benefit of all the measures now in place to welcome immigrants.
I believe Bouchard-Taylor stated that they do not subscribe to the multicultural philosophy prevalent in the RoC. According to them, the Quebec way is an “intercultural” path, in which both the welcoming society and the new arrivals are able to express and enrich each other’s culture, all within the basic framework of equality of the sexes and other principles which characterize Quebec and underpin that society.
Unfortunately, there’s also a strong secular movement among some French Canadians that would like to break with Quebec’s religious past by erasing all forms of religious references, no matter the religion, from public view.
I’ve yet to read the recommendations made by the two, so I won’t cast a vote for their exile …
May 24th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Gabby “Unfortunately, there’s also a strong secular movement among some French Canadians (and leftoids in Toronto) that would like to break with Quebec’s (Canada’s) religious past by erasing all forms of religious references, no matter the religion( except THEIR religion ..socialism)”
Toronto is now Balkanized as a result of this same socialist perversity. We are saying “come to Hotel Canada and carry on as you were in your 3rd world hell hole”. There is no firm stand on what we value, in fact McGuinty will help fund the immigrants’ former culture. But Charest and the National Assembly valued their history and rejected the recommendations of Bouchard and Taylor who are typical socialist humanists.
This academic attitude is elitist, claiming ‘we westerners’ alone have the ability to give up our beliefs and behaviour, while the peasant-immigrant-ethnics don’t have that ability, so we ‘allow’ them to retain their peasant beliefs because it keeps them quiet and behaved.
Again, I hope McGuinty is watching as Charest will advance in the polls on this and sideline Dumont who gained ground partly because he alone had recognized Quebecoise as having had enough of being shoved around by the socialist intellectuals … the same crowd as the separatists.
May 24th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Can muslim women have more than one husband.
Hey, all you men out there that have another woman, just tell the wife you have converted to muslim and are practicing polygamy. Could be cheaper than a divorce.
May 24th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“Can muslim women have more than one husband”
They are too smart for that. Can they have NO husband?
May 24th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Nomdeblog, it’s too bad the members of the secular movement I alluded to seem to have forgotten that it is thanks to their religious antecedents (largely the Catholic Church) that French Canadians were able to hold on to their culture and their language despite the strength of the surrounding Anglo culture (American + Canadian).
There is, however, another side to the problems of multiculturalism. At times, the general population allows itself to be manipulated into near hysteria by the echo chamber effect: one media outlet points out one or a series of isolated incident, a controversy is stirred up, talk shows begin to vent on the perceived controversy, and before we know it, we are facing “a crisis” of cataclysmic proportions, if one is to believe all the noise and static which is then broadcast and printed. Bouchard-taylor also pointed to that effect.
In the GTA case, a thorough investigation should be done of how many polygamous relationships there really are, and immediately cut off welfare benefits to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th wives. That could dissuade some of the would-be husbands.
I know, I’m probably dreaming in wonderful technicolour …
MaryT asked a very intriguing question. Are Muslim women allowed to be polygamous too?
According to The Star article, apparently not:
“.. for those who wish to practise, there are strict conditions: “If you deem it best for the orphans, you may marry their mothers – you may marry two, three, or four. If you fear lest you become unfair, then you shall be content with only one, or with what you already have.”
“The purpose of polygamy was to protect women,” said Shahina Siddiqui, a social worker with the Islamic Social Services Association, who has worked on a number of polygamy cases.”
I.e., polygamy was apparently set up as a means of providing for widows and their children. However, it appears that as practised here, it benefits only the men.
May 24th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Nomdeblog says:
“We value our history which includes the Reformed Christian religion which allowed for the separation of church and state along with the development of capitalism and the rights of individuals versus the collective.”
I really like that statement. I am not familiar with your on line presence but I enjoyed that little sentence above. I infer your reformed comment to include the acceptance of interest payments on loans in the Christian community. Dissecting the rest of your comments requires a book.
I will google your name.
May 24th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
Hoarfrost, there are many angles to that “reformed’ thought, including Max Weber’s most famous book The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.
I think the reason the socialist secular extremists take such an intense dislike to Christianity is a follow through to Marx’s comment that religion is the opium of the masses. It turns out that socialism is the opium of the masses because it is a quasi religion and as such it aspires to being both a religion and the state. It is interesting how Quebec once very Catholic, has practically become post-religious like Europe and like Europe replaced the paternalism of the Catholic Church with socialism. But maybe the pendulum is swinging back a bit in Quebec, Gabby above would know.
People of faith tend to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and consequently don’t need big government. The Socialists don’t like to compete with that thinking. Socialists don’t like competition of any kind. Interesting they have something in common with the Islamofascists on low tolerance for competition. Also both combine religion and state.
May 25th, 2008 at 12:31 am
You are right……the way it’s practiced in Canada, it only benefits the men…..
And it sucks that the keepers of our faith are allowing this to run unchecked throughout the muslim community.