Category Archives: Polygamy

How does one approach a polygamous situation (as a potential second/subsequent wife)?

There are many different aspects to consider when one is thinking about a prospective polygamous marriage situation. If one is approached to become a second (or third, or fourth) wife, it is important to ask the honest questions and also flesh out the details -first to yourself, then to your potential spouse- before agreeing to polygamy. None of it can be taken lightly; monogamous marriage is already a challenge, and polygamous marriage is on a level of its own.

Here are a few important points you may want to consider:

Alhamdulillah, we're at over 850 supporters. Help us get to 900 supporters this month. All it takes is a small gift from a reader like you to keep us going, for just $2 / month.

The Prophet (SAW) has taught us the best of deeds are those that done consistently, even if they are small. Click here to support MuslimMatters with a monthly donation of $2 per month. Set it and collect blessings from Allah (swt) for the khayr you're supporting without thinking about it.

These are just some of the major factors to consider and investigate before going through with a polygamous marriage. Polygamy is not for the faint of heart or the poor of planning! The challenges are many, and more complicated than with monogamy. Even this list is just the beginning

What questions have you been too afraid to ask about polygamy? Leave your questions or concerns in the comment section, and stay tuned to see more answers in the future inshaAllah!

Read more:

What to Expect When You're ExpectingPolygamy - MuslimMatters

Roger Patterson, AiGU.S., refutes the notion that Scripture condones polygamy.

The Bible is an incredibly candid book when compared to the religious writings of other traditions. Rather than covering up the faults and flaws of its key figures, the Bible frequently shows us humanity in its deepest sin. A prime example of this is the transparent treatment of Davids adulterous relationship with Bathsheba and his murder of Uriah (2 Samuel 11). These sinful actions had real consequences from which we can draw lessons, and Davids repentance gives us a model to follow when we fall into sin. Likewise, the Bible records many instances of polygamy in the Old Testament, involving even some of the patriarchs of Israel.

Though our common usage of polygamy tends to be applied to a man with multiple wives, the word polygamy simply means multiple spouses. More accurately, polygyny would be one man with multiple wives, while polyandry would be one woman with multiple husbands. Bigamy is another word used for having two spouses. More recently, those who live in communities of open relationships have been called polyamorous, having multiple husbands, wives, boyfriends, and girlfriends in various arrangements. As we look at Scripture, none of these arrangements matches the structure of marriage given by God from the beginning.

When God created the universe, He did things in a very specific manner. Those descriptions are provided for us in Genesis 12. At the end of His creative activity, God pronounced the things He had made as being very good (Genesis 1:31). In Genesis 2 we learn the details of the creation of mankind. After creating Adam from the dust of the ground, God presented the beasts of the field and the birds of the air to Adam to name. When Adam found no suitable helper, God formed the first woman from Adams side.

And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him. Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name. So Adam gave names to all cattle, to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper comparable to him.

And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.

And Adam said: This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.

And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. (Genesis 2:1825)

Lets look closely at this passage and note several key phrases that indicate Gods intent for marriage to be monogamousone man for one woman. First, God intended to make a helper for Adam, not several helpers. Second, from one rib God made one woman for Adam. Genesis 2:24 reveals the pattern of a man leaving his family to be joined to his wife, not wives. This union is then described as becoming one flesh.

Jesus confirmed this understanding of marriage when he was asked about divorce by the Pharisees. This is recorded in Mark 10:112 and Matthew 19:112. In His response Jesus quoted from Genesis 2, confirming that His understanding of marriage was one man for one woman. Confirming the covenantal nature of marriage, Jesus said that divorce was only allowed because of the hardness of the hearts of man. God intended, from the beginning, for marriages to consist of one man and one woman for the duration of their lives. Divorce and polygamy were regulated in the laws given to Moses, but polygamy was recorded long before then.

The first reference to polygamy is found in Genesis 4 in the lineage of Cain. Of Lamech, a descendant of Cain, we read:

Then Lamech took for himself two wives: the name of one was Adah, and the name of the second was Zillah. And Adah bore Jabal. He was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock. His brothers name was Jubal. He was the father of all those who play the harp and flute. And as for Zillah, she also bore Tubal-Cain, an instructor of every craftsman in bronze and iron. And the sister of Tubal-Cain was Naamah.

Then Lamech said to his wives:Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;Wives of Lamech, listen to my speech!For I have killed a man for wounding me,Even a young man for hurting me.If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold. (Genesis 4:1925)

Before the Flood, we have a clear distortion of what God had intended for marriage. To compound Lamechs sin, he brags of his murderous deeds. The Flood was brought upon the earth to judge the sinfulness of mankind, including the sins committed by Lamech.

After the Flood, there are many mentions of polygamous relationshipsincluding among the patriarchs of Israel. Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon all had multiple wives. It is interesting to note that there are no passages in Scripture that clearly state, No man should have more than one wife. However, polygamous relationships are never mentioned in a positive light, and, indeed, the problems of such relationships are presented.

Consider the consequences revealed in Scripture in each of the following cases: Abrahamled to bitterness between Sarah and her maid, Hagar, and the eventual dismissal of Hagar and Ishmael; Jacobled to Rachels jealousy of Leah and to Joseph being betrayed and sold by his half-brothers; Davidled to the rape of one of his daughters (Tamar) by one of his sons (Tamars half-brother Amnon) and Amnons subsequent murder by Tamars brother Absalom; Solomonhis many wives turned away his heart from the Lord and to the worship of false gods (1 Kings 11:18). Just because the Bible records polygamous relationships does not mean that God approves of such things.

The only direct command against polygamy is given to the kings that were to rule Israel, as they are told not to multiply wives to themselves (Deuteronomy 17:17). It is also interesting to note that polygamous relationships seem to be regulated in the commands Moses gave to the nation of Israel. Leviticus 18:18 instructs that a man should not marry sisters, and Deuteronomy 21:15 talks of assigning an heir to a man with two wives. Many commentators suggest that the passages do not endorse polygamy but rather prohibit it. Deuteronomy 21:15 may also be translated as has had two wives in succession rather than at the same time. The sisters in Leviticus 18:18 are understood by some to be any Israelite women. Regardless of the interpretation of these passages, the taking of multiple wives is not in accord with Gods design from the beginning.

Moving to the New Testament, there are several passages that can be understood to speak against polygamous relationships. The first to come to the mind of many would be the qualifications for leaders in the church given by the Apostle Paul to Timothy and Titus. In 1 Timothy 3:2 and 12 and Titus 1:6, we are told that leaders of the church must be the husband of one wife.

In 1 Corinthians 7:116 Paul answered questions that the Corinthian church had about marriage. In this passage Paul used the singular form of wife and husband throughout the passage. In fact, this is true of the New Testament writers in general.

Scripture compares the relationship of husband and wife to that of Christ and the church. In Ephesians 5:2533 Paul explained this relationship and referred back to Genesis 2:24. Once again, Gods standard for marriage is defined as one man and one woman. Paul finished this analogy by stating, let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband (Ephesians 5:33).

Other religions have promoted polygamy. For example, according to Sura 4:3 of the Koran, Islamic men are allowed to take up to four wives under certain circumstances. Muhammad was granted the privilege of many wives in Sura 33 and had many wives. Modern Muslims practice polygamy in various ways according to their cultural context.

Historically, members of the Latter-day Saints (LDS or Mormons) practiced polygamy, although the acceptance of the practice changed as new revelation was given to the prophets of the church. Initially, the Book of Mormon decried polygamy. Jacob 2:2328 and 3:58 denounce the practice of polygamy as an abomination before God. Likewise, the Doctrine and Covenants (a supposed revelation given to Joseph Smith) state clearly that marriage should be one man for one woman (D&C 42:22). Later writings of Smith allow for unlimited plural marriage to virgins (D&C 132:5166) and directly contradict what had been written earlier.1

Polygamy, more accurately polygyny, was practiced secretly by some Latter-day Saints from the 1830s until the 1850s, when the church admitted to the teaching after many previous denials. Eventually, they were pressured into denouncing polygamy after it was vigorously prosecuted by the federal government. From the 1870s on, many LDS leaders encouraged rebellion against the laws, but in 1890, LDS president Wilford Woodruff encouraged members to obey the laws.2 This caused a large split in the church, and new organizations were formed by those who continued the practice of polygamy and considered themselves as faithfully adhering to the commands of God over mans laws. Some secretly practiced polygamy while others abstained.3 What has become the mainline LDS Church currently denounces polygamy and claims that anyone who practices it is not a true Mormon.4 It is clear that, despite appeals to the patriarchs, the Bible was not the source of the Mormon doctrine of polygamy.

Despite these supposed additional revelations from God, the Bible makes it clear that He intends marriage to be between one man and one womanas it was from the beginning (Matthew 19:8; Mark 10:6). Any challenge to this teaching stands in opposition to Gods plan for His creation. This short chapter cannot exhaustively cover all of the issues related to polygamy, but we can look to the Bible as the standard for understanding the world we live in. As we face specific questions regarding plural marriage, let us prayerfully consider what God has revealed and apply the principles He has given us in Scripture.

Read more here:

What About Polygamy in the Bible? | Answers in Genesis

After spending close to $7 billion on Amazon Prime Video by 2019, Jeff Bezos reportedly had a simple message for his executive team, looking to craft content for its streaming arm: I want my Game of Thrones. And receive Bezos didthat is, adaptation rights for Robert Jordans fantasy series, The Wheel of Time, which currently comprises 14 novels and some 8,000 plus pages, an entire world of peoples and powers and organizations. At the center of this fantasy epicnessand, therefore, at the center of the reported $80 million first seasonare the Aes Sedai.

The success of the first season seems to rest on Amazons ability to faithfully bring these women to screen. To capture their powers and history and culture and politics. While the world of the Wheel of Time novels spans several domains of characters, the Aes Sedai will anchor the action of Amazons first season; they are the force that stands against the seasons main antagonists; they are the order sought by its principal characters and hunted by its white-adorned foes.

But after the opening episodes of the series, the Aes Sedai remain a force most readers will barely know how to spell, let alone understand enough to appreciate future actions. For more than enough information, you can check out A Wheel of Time Wiki, which chronicles every instance of Aes Sedai in fictional history.

To keep things simple, were breaking down the most important features of this magical order. Heres what you need to know about the Aes Sedai to follow the $80 million events of the first season of The Wheel of Time.

The Aes Sedai are an order of women, each with access to the One Powerwhich comes from the True Source, something like the lingering fumes following the creation of the world. Aes Sedai can access (or channel) this inexhaustible resource. Any woman who can channel the One Power or are born with the spark (channeling abilities on steroids) can become an Aes Sedai if properly trained. Egwene, the closest thing to a main character for the shows first season, is one such person born with a spark.

The ringsin the shape of an Ouroboros, or in the series called Great Serpent, a snake swallowing its tale and representing eternitydont give the Aes Sedai power. They are simply awarded to students after reaching a certain level of training.

The entire order of Aes Sedai is divided into Ajahs or individually-governed groups corresponding to a different color. Each has a separate philosophical focus.

Early on in the series we meet a Red Ajah hoping to capture men attempting to channel the one powercapturing them is the role of the Red Ajah.

The primary Aes Sedai we meet in season 1, Moiraine Damodred (Rosemand Pike) is a Blue Ajah, which focus on righteousness and justice.

Read more about the other colors here.

All the handsome men accompanying the Aes Sedai are Warders, bodyguards bonded psychologically and spiritually to the Aes Sedai. Each Aes Sedai is bonded to one Warner, though some polygamy is allowed.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

See the rest here:

Who are the Aes Sedai in 'The Wheel of Time'? Rings, Explained - menshealth.com

What is Polygamy?

Polygamy consists of one person having multiple spouses and are usually faith-based. The most common form of polygamy is polygyny, which is where a man has multiple wives, and the opposite where a woman has multiple husbands is called polyandry. Be sure to check out our articles to learn more about polygamy and the poly community.

While polygamy and polyamory are both forms of consensual non-monogamy, they do have one main difference. Polygamy is specific to one person being married to multiple partners or sister wives, while polyamory refers to a wider range multi-partner relationships. At Sister Wives, we fully embrace all forms of polygamy and polyamory, and provide all members of the poly community the same opportunity to find the love they seek.

In the United States (and other countries) it is illegal to marry someone if you are still legally married to someone else. Poly relationships can still have weddings, but in order to comply with the law it can only be for ceremonial purposes. While we are optimistic that polygamy will one day be legalized, it is important to know that you can still have a happy, fulfilling polygamist relationship where you think of each other as spouses and live together, even if you arent legally married.

Read more:

Sister Wives | Polygamy Dating and Matchmaking Service

In the Conference Womens Issues, Opportunities, Threats, the reasons for the polygamy of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) will be examined.

AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA):In the Conference Womens Issues, Opportunities, Threats, the reasons for the polygamy of the Prophet (p.b.u.h) will be examined.

The scientific conference Womens Issues, Opportunities and Threats on the topic of prominent women in the history of Islam will be held by the Department of Womens Affairs of International University of AhlulBayt (a.s.).

In the conference, the reasons for the polygamy of the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) will be examined.

The meeting will be held with the speech of Dr. Mohammad Hossein Rajabi Davani on Tuesday, November 9, 2021, at https://elc2.dpm.ir:443/rdyv1s5d32mi, and the participants will be awarded valid certificate.

..........................................

End/ 257

More here:

Rajabi Davani to examine Reasons for polygamy of the Prophet (pbuh) - Ahlul Bayt News Agency: Providing Shia News

Another episode of Mzansis most loved polygamy reality TV show, uThando Nesthembu aired on Thursday evening, and once again viewers are left astounded by the way in which the sister wives treat each other, and the attitude and bitterness that some of them have towards their husband, Musa Mseleku.

Last weeks uThando Nesthembu episode touched on the transport club that takes the Mseleku children to and from school on a daily basis.

During dinner, MaCele raised the issue and asked MaNgwabe why she has chosen to transport her kids to school and not let them join the transport club with the rest of the Mseleku children.

MaNgwabe said that it was nothing personal and that she chooses to transport her own children because it gives her the chance to bond with her children and spend more quality time with them.

uThando Nesthembu viewers were not pleased and satisfied with her response, and most felt that there was a bigger issue at hand which she does not want to disclose.

ALSO READ: Isthembu is never the answer: Viewers react to uThando Nesthembu

In Thursday evenings episode, Musa revealed to MaCele that the real reason MaNgwabe decided to pull her children out of the transport club was because MaKhumalos father (the transport driver) once asked MaNgwabes son to open the gate for him, and then asked him to assist in helping one of the other children get off the transport.

Musa explained that this was supposed to be kept a secret from MaNgwabe between himself and MaNgwabes sister, but she, unfortunately, found out what had happened through her sister.

MaCele then expressed how MaNgwabes children being taken out of the transport club has an effect on the whole family, because when MaNgwabe cannot transport her children, then she or any of the other wives have to step in to transport her children when there is a transport club that is already transporting the rest of Mselekus children.

I think BabMseleku and Mbali have their own issues that they need to resolve together and not involve us in some things because of their issues, said MaCele.

When Mseleku went to visit MaNgwabe to discuss the issue further, she said that she would be happy to let her children join the transport club again, but only if the driver who previously mistreated her children would be replaced.

Musa made it clear that her request would not be possible, because he cannot fire MaKhumalo father from doing his job.

Here is what uThando Nesthembu viewers had to say about Thursday evenings episode:

Original post:

uThando Nesthembu reactions: Theres nothing wrong with putting her kids first - The Citizen

Retaining Balance: The Eternal Way. M R Venkatesh. KW Publishers Pvt Ltd. 2021. Page 484. Price Rs 780.

At its most sublime, Dharma is not religion. It is a pursuit of higher and better truths. At its widest base in society, Dharma is about maintaining a balance in perspective, words, actions and ideals. Without balance and a degree of self-restraint, civilisation would not exist.

This preamble sets the stage of what I consider one of the handful of books published this year that everyone should read, regardless of whether you belong to the Dharmic tradition or the Abrahamic one. The book is M R Venkateshs Retaining Balance: The Eternal Way, which holds a mirror to all the follies of Western civilisation which we are now mindlessly trying to ape.

A lawyer and chartered accountant by profession, the core idea contained in Venkateshs book is simple: civilisation is held up by human institutions, and the most fundamental institution holding up the superstructure is the family, which can be loosely defined as one household unit under which not just two spouses and children reside, but also their progeny, and sometimes the progeny of the progeny (the now rapidly disintegrating joint family, so to speak). And the core of the core is the partnership between two genders: woman and man. Civilisation is built on the shoulders and balance between these two genders, though one can today take the position that families can be considered families even if the two partners are from the same gender.

Much of this is commonsense, for the family is the oldest of human institutions, the one which made humans colonise and dominate the living world. So, one would presume that in any policy-making effort, whether it is in economics or in other fields, the family would be the primary unit of study and focus. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Macroeconomics is failing today not for want of mathematical models or long-term funding the opposite is the case but because it has failed to incorporate the family household in its calculations. According to Venkatesh, the West is eviscerating the family partly because of the dogmas inherent in Christianity, even though the church sees itself as a defender of family values.

Families are falling apart not because the church is de-emphasising family, but because the basic ideological postulates of Christianity logically lead to wokeism, communism, extremism and feminism of the kind that destroys families by pitting spouse against spouse. A corollary of pitting the individual against the family and other social institutions is that state and markets become the default institutions needed to safeguard the rights of individuals. The individual, in this view, is seen to be driven by purely materialistic and biological impulses, which need protection by the state and fulfilment of desires by consumer markets.

Islam, even while formally emphasising family values, puts religious duty above all else and destabilises society in two ways: one is by sanctioning polygamy, which is a threat to the balance between genders in a family, and, secondly, by making its dogmas applicable not only to believers, but kafirs through intimidation and violence, if necessary. Any religion which believes that its job is to fix other people cannot end up being a factor for peace and stability.

As for Christianity, its dogma starts with the idea of man as fallen and broken, born in original sin. Hence salvation is through the only 'son of god'. Man cannot lift himself by his own efforts. In religion, you need a specific god to help you uplift yourself, and if you dont have religion, there are creeds like Marxism and liberalism which will develop theories like dictatorship of the proletariat, critical race theory and intersectionality to deny you your power of agency. All these ideologies are inimical to the idea of families and balance in perspective, seeing them as the biggest threats to liberalism and utopian emancipation.

Venkateshs book is divided into 10 chapters, in which I would pick chapter one, which deals substantially with the issue of monogamy and polygamy, chapter 4 (Culture Emerging Frontiers of Economics), chapter 8 (Needed: Economic Reforms or Reforms in Economics?). The last two chapters The Power of Restraint and Ram Rajya Is Less of Lord Rama, More of Rajya summarise the authors views on the importance of family and balance, and how the state cannot be the ultimate answer to a societys needs.

Venkatesh is particularly harsh on polygamy, which is not only sanctioned in Islam, but now finds intellectual support in the West, where some intellectuals now claim that the next frontier of liberalism is challenging the one-man-one-woman norm. The author is clear that even if polygamy is not as widespread as feared, by leaving many men without mates, society will face violence from this cohort. Over and above that, it damages the idea of family, as women feel devalued and disowned whenever a man takes another wife.

While there are obviously more liberal Muslim societies and less liberal ones, I did a small check on Saudi Arabia (where polygamy is practised more than in other Muslim countries) and found Venkateshs proposition to be valid. According to a study published last year, some 66 per cent of young Saudis in the age group of 15-34 were unmarried, and no surprise here the percentage of unmarried men was much higher than the percentage of unmarried women in this group (75.6 per cent versus 56 per cent). Another study, done a bit earlier, found that there were half a million Saudis with more than one wife, with one particular man having married 58 times. He does not remember most of their names, and has lost count of the number of children he had with them.

The chapter on economics is particularly riveting, for it questions the basic assumptions of both Keynesian and Hayekian economics, one favouring a larger role for the state, and the latter markets. Venkatesh believes that economists have sold their souls to the financial services industry and have been producing research that effectively backs the increasing financialisation of most economies. One negative fallout of this domination of finance over economics is the 2008 crisis, with the Covid-19 crisis only reinforcing the same vulnerabilities.

Venkatesh quotes many studies in the West to show how economics has been corrupted by high finance. When economics becomes the hand-maiden of financial services and not the other way round the world will indeed lurch from crisis to crisis. The efficient market theory, often used to justify over-liberal monetary policies and cheap money, has not only proved to be a hoax, but is now widely accepted as unrelated to reality.

In this chapter, Venkatesh also shows how even reputed economists from Raghuram Rajan to Manmohan Singh lost their way. The former is widely credited with having forecast the 2008 crisis years in advance, but when he was part of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) think-tank and governor of the Reserve Bank of India, he did little to prevent banks from lending to even more to bankrupt sectors like infrastructure. Manmohan Singh, as Secretary General of the South Commission, told us in a 1990 report that massive financialisation was destabilising the world economy, but as the architect of the 1991 liberalisation and as prime minister from 2004-14, his views changed 180 degrees. Finance ultimately manages to pull wool over the eyes of economists by its powerful presence.

The responses to financial and/or economic collapse often boil down to only one thing printing more money and making interest rates very low. Venkatesh is clear that the remedies will prove worse than the disease as such policies destroy the credit culture and decimate the value of peoples savings. The world is now unable to distinguish between a financial crisis and an economic crisis.

Now, why does it need a non-economist to tell economists that they dont know their backsides from their elbows? And what does Venkatesh see that economists have missed?

Two simple answers: sometimes, it takes an innocent child to exclaim that the emperor has no clothes. And two, the missing element in all economic analysis may be an inability to understand the impact of culture on economic behaviours and outcomes. Economists simply assume away, or wish away, what they cannot understand or find difficult to measure.

Summing up, Venkatesh says that family is a key balancer in civilisation. It acts as a balance between men and women, individuals and society, savings and consumption, progress and security, liberty and equality, and rights and duties, among other things. The world has forgotten that balance is the key to civilisational survival, and extreme ideologies, whether emanating from religious dogmas or academic papers and intellectuals, spell doom. Dharmic balance is the key to human survival. Thank you Venkatesh for reminding us about commonsense.

Read more:

Its The Family, Stupid: Book Explains Why Liberals And Economists Get It So Wrong - Swarajya

PAY ATTENTION: Click See First under the Following tab to see Briefly News on your News Feed!

Kevin Wesley is a man who proudly practices polygamy as he married two wives and they live together as a family.

Kevin however didn't marry the two ladies at the same time.

In a video shared by Love Don't Judge on Facebook, Kevin stated that he first married Jamie with their 14-year-old union producing kids.

Enjoy reading our stories? Download the BRIEFLY NEWS app on Google Play now and stay up-to-date with major South African news!

The couple however separated. Kevin said while they were separated, he met Lacee online.

His relationship with Lacee blossomed and led to marriage. However, Jamie, his first wife returned.

Kevin remarked that contrary to opinions that his wives are brainwashed, they both love each other.

According to him, the ladies are best of friends.

On how he manages the relationship with them, Kevin said he spends time with Jamie on Mondays and Tuesdays, while Lacee takes Wednesdays and Thursdays.

The rest of the day is for everyone.

Nancy Mac An said:

Collins Nosakhare Igbinoba wrote:

Melanie Palmer opined:

Lisa Marie remarked:

Meanwhile, Briefly News previously reported that a farmer who married two wives on the same day has given reasons for his action.

The young man, who hails from Igbide in the Isoko South local government area of Delta state, told The Punch that he met his first wife in 2008 and the second one in 2010.

The young man Ekpe said he decided to marry the two ladies on the same day because he loves them both.

Ekpe said his wives don't get into physical fights when they have disagreements. According to him, he settles their differences himself or calls his friends to talk to them.

Source: Briefly.co.za

Continued here:

Polygamist Says 2 Wives Are Best Friends, Splits the Week Up Between Them South Africa news - Briefly

On Thursday evenings episode of Mzansis most loved polygamy reality TV show, uThando Nesthembu, Musa Mseleku thanked his wives for the beautiful birthday celebration they threw for him by sending them on a getaway.

The trip also served as an opportunity to get the wives to spend more time together and create closer bonds, especially since their husband has said numerous times in the past that there is no unity in their polygamous marriage, mostly among the four wives.

When the wives arrived at their destination, they each had to choose a set of keys to their separate bedrooms. Jokingly, the first wife, MaCele, snatched the second wife MaYenis key out of her hand, which angered her and left her in a sour mood.

ALSO READ: Viewers react to MaNgwabes attitude towards Musa on uThando Nesthembu

On their trip, the four sister wives decided to play a game to make their mini vacation a little interesting, but the attempt to lighten the mood quickly died and created tension between the wives.

The game was each wife picks a note from a box filled with different notes, which all pose a question to whoever picked the note about an act of service they recently received from one of the other wives.

After they have read out the question on the note, the person reading the note then places a flower in front of the wife who has recently given the act of service, which has been specified on the note.

Viewers were not shocked to see that MaYeni did not receive a single flower from any of the other wives, because they know that she has the habit of being cold and rude towards her sister wives.

What angered the viewers was when MaYeni received a note which asked her who was the last sister wife to transport her kids to and from school, or anywhere else, and she failed to acknowledge and thank MaKhumalo with a flower as she transports her child from school to her home every Monday and Friday.

View post:

Viewers react to MaYenis bitterness on uThando Nesthembu - The Citizen

International rights watchdogs have long charged that the judiciary system in Tajikistan is often used to punish perceived enemies of the government.

There are, indeed, many cases in recent years to support those claims. And even when moved to gestures of mercy, the Tajik courts and state officials seem callous in their actions.

The following are some of the most egregious recent cases.

The Lawyer

Buzurgmehr Yorov is a Tajik attorney who was detained in late September 2015 and shortly thereafter sentenced to 28 years in prison.

In honor of Tajikistan marking 30 years of independence this year, an amnesty has been granted to some prisoners. Yorov had four years removed from his long sentence.

The 50-year-old attorney had a reputation for defending people who had little, if any, chance of proving their innocence in Tajik courts.

He defended members of the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan (IRPT), a group that had been in a power-sharing agreement with President Emomali Rahmons government and was later seen by Rahmon as an impediment to his exerting greater control over the country.

Yorov also defended fellow lawyer Fakhriddin Zokirov, who was the attorney of businessman Zayd Saidov.

Saidov founded a new political party -- Tajikistan Now -- in April 2013 and was convicted in December that same year on charges of fraud, polygamy, and statutory rape, charges seen as politically motivated.

Zokirov was arrested in March 2014 on forgery charges and was held for eight months before he received an amnesty.

Saidovs second lawyer, Shuhrat Kudratov, was sentenced to nine years in prison on charges of fraud and bribery. His term was shortened after two rounds of amnesties.

In early September 2015, there was an outbreak of violence near the capital, Dushanbe.

The government said it was an attempted coup led by the deputy defense minister, who many years earlier had tenuous ties with the IRPT.

The IRPT was quickly blamed, declared an extremist group, and banned.

All its top members who were still in Tajikistan were arrested and sentenced to long prison terms.

Yorov intended to defend some of the top IRPT officials and said in an interview on September 28, 2015, that one of his clients was being tortured.

On September 29, Yorov was detained on fraud charges that allegedly dated back to 2010.

Originally sentenced to 23 years, Yorov had five more years tacked on at two later trials.

At one of those trials, Yorov was given two extra years for contempt of court for quoting 11th-century poet and polymath Ibn Sina, also known as Avicenna.

International rights groups condemned the entire process from the lawyer's detention to the court decision.

The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights issued an assessment in June 2019 that said taking into account all the circumstances of the case, the appropriate remedy would be to release Mr. Yorov immediately, and to accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations.

Yorovs sentence was reduced by another 6 1/2 years under an amnesty in 2019, so with the subtraction of another four years, and time already served, he still faces 11 1/2 more years in prison.

That would mean he would be released when he is 61 years old.

The Opposition Figure

Mahmurod Odinaev is the deputy head of the opposition Social Democratic Party (SDP).

The Social Democrats are now the only genuine opposition party still registered in Tajikistan.

Odinaev is in prison, serving a 14-year term, though the recent amnesty shaved three years off that sentence.

In November 2020, Odinaev posted a message on his Facebook page appealing to Dushanbe Mayor Rustam Emomali, the son of the Tajik president, to allow the SDP to hold a demonstration against increasing food prices.

Odinaev disappeared on November 20, 2020. On December 5, the prosecutors office confirmed that he was under arrest.

In late January 2021, Odinaev was convicted of hooliganism and calling for extremism based on his request to hold a protest rally.

His son, Habibullo Rizoev, was a co-defendant. He was fined 58,000 somonis (about $5,000).

In March 2021, another of Odinaevs sons, Shaikhmuslihiddin Rizoev, was convicted of hooliganism and attempted rape and sentenced to six years in prison.

The 59-year-old Odinaev refused to sign the amnesty, saying he never did anything illegal and is wrongly imprisoned. Ordinaev added that he will only accept his immediate release and full exoneration.

The Cast-Iron Teapot

In mid-September 2021, four members of the IRPT who were imprisoned after the alleged coup attempt in September 2015 managed to get a letter out of prison in which they again professed their innocence and asked that their cases be reviewed in the presence of international experts.

The four are Zubaydullohi Rozik, who is serving a 25-year sentence; Hikmatullo Sayfullozoda, who has a 16-year sentence; Rahmatulloi Rajab, serving a 28-year sentence; and Muhammadali Fayzmuhammad, who was sentenced to 23 years in prison.

The letter was made public on September 16, the day the Tajik opposition in exile marks as the Day of Political Prisoners.

Tajik officials were unmoved by the appeal. There was no official reaction from Dushanbe.

At the end of September there were reports that the 70-year-old Sayfullozoda had been attacked early one morning while in a prison hospital.

He had undergone heart surgery in June and has been housed in the prison hospital since shortly after the operation.

There were concerns Sayfullozoda was being tortured in prison.

The Justice Ministry released a statement on October 8 denying the reports of torture.

The ministry did confirm that Sayfullozoda was attacked, but they claimed that the assault was by another inmate. And not just by any prison inmate, but a prisoner who was from the United Tajik Opposition, the IRPT-led civil war opponents of the Tajik government.

According to relatives, the inmate came into Sayfullozodas room and hit him on the head with a cast-iron teapot.

There were reports that another author of the letter, Rahmatullo Rajab, had been physically attacked.

Relatives of Rajab said at the start of October that they heard someone attacked him with a knife.

Some of his relatives went to Vahdat Prison to try to get more information. They could not see Rajab but were able to speak with him by telephone.

They said Rajab denied he had been attacked but they added that he was very careful about what he said, and the relatives left with the impression that someone else was listening to Rajab when he spoke.

Prison officials denied Rajab was being tortured while incarcerated.

Tajikistans ombudsman, Umed Bobozoda, later visited Sayfullozoda, Rajab, and another imprisoned IRPT member, Abdykahhor Davlatov.

Bobozoda said Rajab and Davlatov denied they were being tortured and Sayfullozoda confirmed he had been attacked but not by a prison guard.

But no independent confirmation of any of these charges or reports has been possible, with all the information available coming from prison officials or the ombudsman.

The Rights Defender

Izzat Amon had lived in Russia since 1996 and nearly always dedicated himself to helping Tajik migrant laborers in Russia.

In 2000, Amon helped establish the Center for Tajiks of Moscow and helped Tajik migrants in the Russian capital register with Russian authorities, find places to live and work, and offered advice and services for Tajik citizens facing legal problems.

On the eve of the 2020 parliamentary vote in Tajikistan, Amon announced his intention to create a political party and take part in the elections. But he soon abandoned this idea due to the requirement that candidates must have resided in Tajikistan for 10 years prior to an election.

Amon was at times critical of what he believed was the failure of Tajik authorities to stand up to the Russian government and defend the rights of Tajik migrant workers, whose remittances are essential to thousands of families in Tajikistan and whose work is needed in Russia where there is a labor shortage.

Russian authorities detained Amon on March 25, 2021, and forcibly returned him to Tajikistan, where he faced charges of fraud connected to his work in Russia.

On October 19, Amon was convicted of major fraud and sentenced to nine years in prison.

One thing that these cases have in common is that nearly all independent observers, international rights organizations, lawyers organizations, and other witnesses of the trial processes and sentencing of these men agree that their rights were violated.

Visit link:

The Tajik Government's Style Of Justice And Mercy - Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty