whose child?

[rimbun]

http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=4082

any thoughts?

[Steppe]

This is a very interesting but complicated case.

I knew of one case from my home town.

The Chinese woman married a Muslim, hence had to convert to become a Muslim and they had 5 children. Later, the couple divorced and under the muslim court, the woman did not manage to get the custody of the children.

The woman then "de-convert" herself, I think through lawyer etc. and is now a Christian. It seems that she does not even have visiting rights to see her children. The reason is that she may be a bad influence to the children.

[pandaboy]

Hmmm...if that's the case, in future, ppl will start converting to Islam just to gain the custody of their child?

[gatecrasher]

if i'm not mistaken, didn't the mother of former national swimmer nurul huda do just that?

[gatecrasher]

This is a very interesting but complicated case.

I knew of one case from my home town.

The Chinese woman married a Muslim, hence had to convert to become a Muslim and they had 5 children. Later, the couple divorced and under the muslim court, the woman did not manage to get the custody of the children.

The woman then "de-convert" herself, I think through lawyer etc. and is now a Christian. It seems that she does not even have visiting rights to see her children. The reason is that she may be a bad influence to the children.
i've heard that under islamic law, if both parents are muslim, the mother automatically gets custody? i may well be wrong though; my knowledge of islam is lacking.
but did you mean to say that the woman didn't get custody of her children even when she was still muslim? if that's the case, then being a muslim is no guarantee of custody, right? in other words, malaysian syariah courts are bending the law?

[Steppe]

The Chinese woman converted to Muslim so that she could marry the man. Hence, when the couple divorced, the mother's custody was never considered because the woman was a convert, had to go back to her Chinese parents who are not muslims and are Christians, etc. etc. etc.

For the sake of children growing under Islam........(this was mentioned in the article above also), the woman was not given the custody and the custody went to the father who took in another wife immediately. The woman wanted a divorce because she did not want to stay with the husband who wanted to take in another wife etc. etc.

It was very difficult to fight a case where the whole gang of in-laws, relatives etc. from the husband side were against her and as the couple was married in the muslim court, it was ruled by the muslim court.

See the difference of this case from the case in the article?

[rimbun]

and in the ft today:

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373928032&p=1012571727169

[deekay]

I would like to think that generally, the children being aged below the "age of discernment" should be with the mother, regardless of race or religious affiliation.

But this is Malaysia, lah. Once you are in the web of organized Islam in the country, it is extremely difficult to do anything else but follow the rules set out. (Or in this case of the Indian children, new rules are made)

Forget about Human Rights or Child Rights or Women's Rights or Divorce Rghts as presumed in the Western world. It does not apply.

The purveyors of the Islamic institutions want to ensure they rule. You are supposed to follow ... or maybe I should say - you are supposed to submit ... even if you are 3 years old and did not choose to be Muslim !

The way to keep Islam as a beautiful religion is to welcome everyone - not by keeping people away. And this case does not help.

[abdullah]

The purveyors of the Islamic institutions want to ensure they rule. You are supposed to follow ... or maybe I should say - you are supposed to submit ...

Right after the death of the prophet, the first Caliph, Abu Bakr, arguably the prophet's most beloved companion, addressed the nascent Islamic state as follows: "Obey me so long as I obey God and His Messenger. But if I disobey God and His Messenger, you owe me no obedience."

It is Islam that spells out so clearly and unmistakably that submission is to God and God Alone.

Malaysia, like every other country with large Muslim populations, continues to deviate further from justice and decency day by day.

As bad as the Malay/Chinese/Indian racial tensions are in Malaysia, a nodding acquaintance with Islamic history will reveal that the internecine tribal warfare in the Arabian peninsula 14 centuries ago was much worse.

The prophet, by the Grace of God, united warring factions into one peaceful community, the archetype of the American e pluribus unum, something beyond the wildest imagining of the people at that time.

As it is, vested interests are keeping the races separated and terrorized in Malaysia, and whatever their declared affiliation, keep in mind the following:

"But as for those who break their bond with God after it has been established, and cut asunder what God has bidden to be joined, and spread corruption on earth -- their due is rejection [by God] (Arabic laknah: curse), and theirs is a most evil fate ."

(Sura Ar-Ra'd, verse 25, tr. Asad)[i]

[ElansarGelmir]

Why would someone want to convert a 3 year old child without the latter's consent, along with conscience? THey are too young to decide which religious faith they want to follow, too young to determine which is right and wrong for them.

Malaysia's High Court this week produced a compromise by granting Ms Shamala day-to-day custody of the sons, while warning her that she could still lose custody if she tried to influence their religious beliefs, such as allowing them to eat pork.

This shows where Malaysia's High Court stands. As much as they are trying to protect civil rights, there's still religion still influences its decisions.

[sanghanuman]

I think that perhaps the way the Islamic law protects its believers against converting to another religion is inconvenient to non Muslims or to Muslims who wish to change their religion.

Muslims do have inconveniences with other "people of religion" as well. Muslims feel intruded when for example, Christian missionaries promote J.C. all the time. We have all the respect for J.C. but we just have different ways of honoring him.

You dont fancy protection.
I dont fancy intrusion.

Hfuh, I dont know.

And yeah, whats with offending other people and later saying "no offense"? It doesnt work that way.

[Thirdshifter]

i've heard that under islamic law, if both parents are muslim, the mother automatically gets custody? i may well be wrong though; my knowledge of islam is lacking.

I believe it is the other way around. In Islam the father gets the custody automatically if the child is does not need to be breast-fed. If they do she will get custody until that period of the infant growth is over.

[ElansarGelmir]

I think that perhaps the way the Islamic law protects its believers against converting to another religion is inconvenient to non Muslims or to Muslims who wish to change their religion.

Muslims do have inconveniences with other "people of religion" as well. Muslims feel intruded when for example, Christian missionaries promote J.C. all the time. We have all the respect for J.C. but we just have different ways of honoring him.

You dont fancy protection.
I dont fancy intrusion.


Well, then i believe there's no freedom to choose of religion if u happen to be from a Muslim family. no personal attack here (Phantom, dun get emotional again), but i think that everyone should be given a chance to learn about other religions before deciding which faith he or she wants to belong to. And if a child is automatically converted without knowing what's it all about, isn't that a little unfair to the child?

[gatecrasher]

Why would someone want to convert a 3 year old child without the latter's consent
for their own selfish ends
...look who's talking! :)
but anyway, that sort of thing will continue happening in malaysia as long as the integration of church and state enables parents to use that as a means of obtaining custody.

And if a child is automatically converted without knowing what's it all about, isn't that a little unfair to the child?
of course it is! and not just a little.

[__earth]

It would have been a non-issue if Malaysia were a secular country.

oh well. it seems religion is a complicatedly problematic complication for a simplitic case. But I guess chess is more exciting than checkers.

Mate in two, babey.

[kucingbiru]

And if a child is automatically converted without knowing what's it all about, isn't that a little unfair to the child?

it might be unfair. in fact, one can argue that deciding the religion of children is unfair too. but to be fair, than parents have to teach their children every single religion there is.

let me ask u something. did your parents teach you about every religion before you became what you are? if not, do you think that your parents were being unfair? i'm just curious. i'm not attacking you or ur parents here.

[deekay]

It would have been a non-issue if Malaysia were a secular country.

Well put, _earth !

But I always thought that Malaysia WAS a secular country with Islam as the official religion. That is quite different that saying that Malaysia is a Islamic state. And nowehere does it state in the Malaysian Constitution that we are an Islamic state.

As a Malaysian, I strongly believe that the best way to maintain balance amongst all that multi-ethnicity, religions, races, etc is to reiterate and constantly reinforce this basic philosophy of being a secular state.

Perhaps those in Recom.org should put this on a wish list. A secular state does not put any religion ahead of another. And just maybe, we could all live happily together.

[Thirdshifter]

Let me just drop the bomb. The majority of Muslim-Malays and insert-race-muslims do not favor the total separation of religion from the goverment. Matter of fact its one of the most campaigned agenda in our last election. Remember how Badawi was telling the malay voters how Islamic UMNO is.

Take a look at putrajaya. 250 Million was spent building a mosque. Where's the 250million Buddhist temple? Hindu temple?

[kucingbiru]

250 Million
damn!!

[deekay]

I think RM 250 million and countless millions of Ringgit spent on too many places of worship for one religion does not do justice to the tax payers who belong to other religions.

Uuurrghh. We need to have some balance. But the politicians are going to use this for their own leverage. Perhaps it is up to the rakyat and next generations to lobby for better use of taxpayers Ringgit.

But if no one voices this out - we are ALL heading down a dangerous path.

Hence, this case of the children's custody and religious choice (or seemingly none if the courts - both civil and Syariah - have their way) is important to reinforce some form of distinction of the rights of Malaysians to practise a religion.

[gatecrasher]

in fact, one can argue that deciding the religion of children is unfair too.
yeah... but it doesn't seem that way because by the time children can think for themselves, their beliefs are already ingrained in them. then again, that means they're happy with their religion, so it's not unfair.
for those who're unhappy, in this country non-muslims can at least change their religion after they reach the legal age of consent, unlike muslims. that's why converting those two kids who in all probability don't fully understand their action (of converting) is unfair.
actually for non-muslims you could say converting children is equivalent to deciding their religion, right?
anyway, this is how some people justify deciding a child's religion instead of letting him decide:
it's like feeding a baby milk. milk is the only food young infants can consume. besides, they're too young to choose what they'd like to have. and (insert religion) is the one true faith, so letting the child decide for himself is like saying that one should let a baby choose what he wants to eat.

[ElansarGelmir]

let me ask u something. did your parents teach you about every religion before you became what you are?

You were pointing this question at me? Well, I am never a Christian until when I was in the end of Form 2. That's when I am one, and I baptized in Form 4 and confirmed in F5... If you are borned in a <insert a religion> family, that doesn't mean that you belong to that religion. To assert that you are from that religion would mean that you are a car if you are born in a garage? And i dun need my parents to teach me of every religions... i know it by myself (through education, shows, books, friends, etc.). Does that answer your question?


that's why converting those two kids who in all probability don't fully understand their action (of converting) is unfair.


Yeah, though one may argue it's up to the children's parents to decide what's best for them, but remember, converting them to a certain religion will have a for-the-rest-of-their-lives impact on them. So it's best if this affects the rest of the child's life, then the child should decide for themselves (especially if you're to be converted into religions that won't allow u to unconvert)...

[phantom]

I believe it is the other way around. In Islam the father gets the custody automatically if the child is does not need to be breast-fed. If they do she will get custody until that period of the infant growth is over.

no.the custody goes to the mum 1st.it's mother,mother,mother and then father,remember?

though i disagree with some things in islam,this is something i applauded.

But I always thought that Malaysia WAS a secular country with Islam as the official religion. That is quite different that saying that Malaysia is a Islamic state. And nowehere does it state in the Malaysian Constitution that we are an Islamic state

explain what is secular to me? does that mean when you start differentiating mosque/church from the state? or does it come by not quoting any religion in your state codes?

if that is so,why certain "secular" country in this world still used religion when it comes to reject gay marriages?so how secular is a secular nation is then?

any country..regardless whether they are from the 1st world or the 3rd world still used religion to some extend in making decision.maybe the 2nd world is different in this case.

malaysia considers islam as our agama rasmi.it doesnt mean malaysian must be muslims.60% of malaysian are muslims.saying that,it means that the muslims are the majority ppl in malaysia,followed by the buddhist around 22%..though that,nobody is killing the non-muslims in malaysia,right?nobody is telling you that you have to be a muslim,right?nobody is saying,pls destroy the church/temple becoz this is a muslim nation,right?albeit giving huge freedom to the non-muslims,they are certain things muslims cannot sacrifice.in a good way i mean.

i never think malaysia is a secular nation.it WAS not.and it will never be one .islam is to some extend is being used to rule the nation.


Let me just drop the bomb. The majority of Muslim-Malays and insert-race-muslims do not favor the total separation of religion from the goverment. Matter of fact its one of the most campaigned agenda in our last election. Remember how Badawi was telling the malay voters how Islamic UMNO is.


izzit?when malay and islam fit like key and lock,it's hard not to tune that.anyway,ain't UMNO managed to help the malays while other parties only know to warble? ada "pemimpin" yang cakap tak serupa bikin,yang pretend like there are here to bring equal justice to malaysian by whole but still at the end of the day only there to save their race,in this sense,i believe umno is being honest.


hmmm,about the case:
can the mother promise that she would give both of her children the space to learn about Islam?or will she block Islam from her children becoz she is afraid that she gonna lost them to their father instead?i believe in islam,mother is still important.regardless of any religion she was,is and will be,islam has taught muslims to be respectful to their mother.

if i am the judge,the children will go under the mum except the mum must promised to teach these kids about islam.and their dad too must be allow to preach about islam to these kids.

case closed.

[ElansarGelmir]

Another issue here: is the act of converting the children legal? Coz they don't have the consent from the mother. What will you do if one day ur spouse (just if) took ur children to a country far far away, convert them to another religion, and then pass the custody back to you? Is that legal?

[phantom]

legal?if the kids under your guidance,aint that to some extend legal?

aren't parents are here to impose what they think on their kids.unless your parents graduate with 4.0 from some parenting school(then they might give you rooms even to decide what name you wanna be tagged.)

[Thirdshifter]

no.the custody goes to the mum 1st.it's mother,mother,mother and then father,remember?

though i disagree with some things in islam,this is something i applauded.

Not according to Malaysia Sharia'a (An islam Doctrine which Malaysia has adopted). In Shari'a its Father, Grandfather, The closest male relative on the father side.

From Shari'a:
Under Shari?a, a father is the natural guardian (al waley) of his children?s persons and property. Shia doctrine also gives the child?s paternal grandfather joint guardianship. According to Shari?a, a child?s paternal grandfather is his or her natural guardian after the father. Under this law, guardianship passes to the next relative on the father?s side if the father and paternal grandfather are unable to act as guardian. Depending on local laws, a father may be able to transfer his power of attorney over his child to other family members. In custody abduction cases, a father brought into court may use this as a means of keeping the child in the custody of his relatives and he may claim that he lacks legal authority to return the child to its mother.

A mother generally has a right to physical, not legal, custody of her child until the child reaches the age of custodial transfer, at which time the child is returned to the physical custody of the father or the father?s family. The right to physical custody is not an absolute right in the sense that a mother or father who possesses physical custody may not prevent the other parent from seeing the child


explain what is secular to me? does that mean when you start differentiating mosque/church from the state? or does it come by not quoting any religion in your state codes?

if that is so,why certain "secular" country in this world still used religion when it comes to reject gay marriages?so how secular is a secular nation is then?

Which country used religion as an excuse to Ban gay marriage? If USA your reffering to, it's not religion. Also they shot down the Idea of banning gay Marriages anyway.

Definition of Secular by Dictionary.com

Not bound by monastic restrictions, especially not belonging to a religious order. Used of the clergy.

In Malaysia we have Jabatan Agama Islam which is Funded directly by the goverment. That alone is enough to make Malaysia a non-secular country. Muslims in Malaysia regardless whether they practice Islam or not are bound to the Laws of Islam. In rare cases like the one in Ipoh where 30 non-Muslim couples http://www.drliew.net/archives/000320.html were fined because they were "berdua-duaan" in a park.



any country..regardless whether they are from the 1st world or the 3rd world still used religion to some extend in making decision.maybe the 2nd world is different in this case.

Thats assuming Malaysia is a secular state which its not.

malaysia considers islam as our agama rasmi.it doesnt mean malaysian must be muslims.60% of malaysian are muslims.saying that,it means that the muslims are the majority ppl in malaysia,followed by the buddhist around 22%..though that,nobody is killing the non-muslims in malaysia,right?nobody is telling you that you have to be a muslim,right?nobody is saying,pls destroy the church/temple becoz this is a muslim nation,right?albeit giving huge freedom to the non-muslims,they are certain things muslims cannot sacrifice.in a good way i mean.

There have been numerous Religion fights in Malaysia. For an example in Penang 1996. Muslims destroyed a Hindu temple at Jalan Kg Rawa because it was to near to their newly built mosque. The Goverment ofcourse did a good job by blacking this out from the media but if you were in penang you would know. Few mosque and couple of more Hindu temple were destroyed in the following days. They even imposed a 7p.m curfew on georgetown. Yup, they all did it because they taught Malaysia is an Islam country and they have the rights to do whatever they did.


i never think malaysia is a secular nation.it WAS not.and it will never be one .islam is to some extend is being used to rule the nation.

Agreed!

Let me just drop the bomb. The majority of Muslim-Malays and insert-race-muslims do not favor the total separation of religion from the goverment. Matter of fact its one of the most campaigned agenda in our last election. Remember how Badawi was telling the malay voters how Islamic UMNO is.


izzit?when malay and islam fit like key and lock,it's hard not to tune that.anyway,ain't UMNO managed to help the malays while other parties only know to warble? ada "pemimpin" yang cakap tak serupa bikin,yang pretend like there are here to bring equal justice to malaysian by whole but still at the end of the day only there to save their race,in this sense,i believe umno is being honest.

Yup, UMNO demokrasi terpimpin. :D

hmmm,about the case:
can the mother promise that she would give both of her children the space to learn about Islam?or will she block Islam from her children becoz she is afraid that she gonna lost them to their father instead?i believe in islam,mother is still important.regardless of any religion she was,is and will be,islam has taught muslims to be respectful to their mother.


According to Islam(the Quran), not Sharia'a; If a mother is not a Muslim she looses her custody rights.

How to solve the case and keeping everyone happy?
Be secular. Look beyond religion. Religion should be the last factor. What is best for the child should be the priority. In this case i think i have to agree with phantoms 'if i am the judge,the children will go under the mum except the mum must promised to teach these kids about islam.and their dad too must be allow to preach about islam to these kids'

[ElansarGelmir]

legal?if the kids under your guidance,aint that to some extend legal?

aren't parents are here to impose what they think on their kids.unless your parents graduate with 4.0 from some parenting school(then they might give you rooms even to decide what name you wanna be tagged.)

Ermm... i mean, parents make up of 2 ppl - father and mother... unless the mother did not play a significant in bringing up those kids those years, then i believe it's unfair for not asking the permission from the mother to convert the children... So by saying what u stated above, i assume you are ok if your spouse convert ur children to other religions. Thank you!

[gatecrasher]

In this case i think i have to agree with phantoms 'if i am the judge,the children will go under the mum except the mum must promised to teach these kids about islam.and their dad too must be allow to preach about islam to these kids'
yeah, since nullifying their conversion is not an available option. *shrugs* otherwise, nullifying their conversion would be the fairest thing to do.
but then again, since their dad in all likelihood converted himself and his children just for the sake of obtaining custody, will he bother to preach islam if what he did was in vain? it's not even certain that he'll bring up the children as muslims if he does obtain custody.

[__earth]

legal?if the kids under your guidance,aint that to some extend legal?

aren't parents are here to impose what they think on their kids.unless your parents graduate with 4.0 from some parenting school(then they might give you rooms even to decide what name you wanna be tagged.)

Parents aren't there to impose beliefs. Parents are there to teach. It will up to the children themselves to decide when they are matured and ready.

But in Islam, maybe that its true that parents are there to impose belief.

[The_Observer]

See why religious wars are so bloody....

Personally, I'd let ppl choose whatever they want. I'd let ppl from other religions to talk to me about their faith and try converting me...seriously, it is a bloody good way to test your faith, to show how sincere you really are. And it can become quite scary at times, mark my words.

Human laws does not apply in Heaven (and so does Physics!).

The Day of Judgement will settle all arguements when It comes...

[__earth]

Human laws does not apply in Heaven (and so does Physics!).

The Day of Judgement will settle all arguements when It comes...

assuming heaven exists in the first place eh?

[phantom]

assuming heaven exists in the first place eh?


i really hope heaven does exist becoz "go to hell" is my fav impolite word uttered.