When the concept of “multiculturalism” was introduced to Canadians, most assumed it meant “more pavilions at Folkfest”.
Hundreds of GTA Muslim men in polygamous marriages — some with a harem of wives — are receiving welfare and social benefits for each of their spouses, thanks to the city and province, Muslim leaders say.
Mumtaz Ali, president of the Canadian Society of Muslims, said wives in polygamous marriages are recognized as spouses under the Ontario Family Law Act, providing they were legally married under Muslim laws abroad.
“Polygamy is a regular part of life for many Muslims,” Ali said yesterday. “Ontario recognizes religious marriages for Muslims and others.”
He estimates “several hundred” GTA husbands in polygamous marriages are receiving benefits. Under Islamic law, a Muslim man is permitted to have up to four spouses.
“If You build It They Will Come”. Trudeau built it, the Charter of rights and Freedoms, they have come and are still coming with all the baggage of Islam. They all have the same rights and even more than we do. How free can they get after being allowed to float around the streets like witches at Halloween and men being allowed four wives all in the name of religion? That’s a freedom we wouldn’t be allowed in Islamic regimes. Try walking down any street in Saudi Arabia or Iran in shorts and see how long you’ll last if you’re a woman.
bountiful BC. and alternative lifestyles. looks like the welfare trick is universal.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/lds_poly1.htm
I think people are outraged by the wrong part of this story. If marriage were not involved, each individual (pre-assuming they are entitled to benefits) would receive their own welfare benefits.
If the five people lived together and did not have jobs, they would all receive individual benefits. Assuming you think receiving welfare benefits is fair (an entirely different point), this should not be a problem. If the individuals were mutually self-supporting and pooled their wealth, but were not married, should they each receive less? No. Now let’s say they are all in some five-way conjugal relationship (but not married). Should that affect their benefits if they are all still poor? No. If five gay men got together in a home and each had sex all of the others and they had no jobs, it should not affect their total benefits. Therefore, the fact that these people are married should not affect their benefits.
I think the welfare aspect of it, from the perspective of their marriage, is irrelevant. What is relevant is the following:
a. these men should not be allowed to bring multiple wives to the country, regardless of whether or not they can be supported, because we do not accept polygamy;
b. we should not allow in immigrants who are not self-supporting (especially if they bring an entire family);
c. non-citizens should not be entitled to benefits; and
d. polygamists in our society should be prosecuted because it is against the law.
The point to note is that there is no “welfare trick” associated with the polygamy in this case. The problem is not with the fact that individuals are entitled to receive benefits, but with polygamy and immigrants who are not self-supporting.
Andrew Grieve: Good post. Definitely no social benefits for new immigrants. It’s a abuse-magnet.
If I may add a couple:
e) we should get rid of the relatively recent concept of family re-unification in favour of skills and potential to contribute economically.
f) end immigration from clearly dangerous 3rd world Muslim countries like Pakistan.
g) there should be some kind of social contract; breathe a single word about sharia law, out you go; commit 3rd-world “honour” murders, go to jail for a long time, then go home.
U.K. pays price of polygamy
…As in Canada, polygamy is illegal in Britain. The punishment there is seven years in jail — it’s five in Canada. The U.K.’s immigration law — like Canada’s — doesn’t allow men to bring multiple wives into the country.
“It sets a precedent that will lead to more demands for the culture of other countries to be reflected in U.K. law and the benefits system,” Conservative critic Chris Grayling told the Telegraph.
The same week the British government was defending its decision to pay polygamous men $66.37 a month for every additional spouse as “the best possible option,” the United Nations urged Saudi Arabia to end the practice of polygamy because it runs contrary to the principles of equality.
It seems while women in the developing world are pushing for an end to the discriminatory and demeaning practice, politicians in the developed world are lurching towards acceptance.
Muslims aren’t yet a powerful political force in Canada. But they soon could be. In 2001, there were 579,600 Muslims in Canada, according to Statistics Canada. That’s slightly more than twice the number of Sikhs in Canada and nearly double the number of Jews.
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the country, with the number of Muslims doubling from 1991 to 2001.
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=ffac802c-71c7-432e-ac30-144723754d34