Sometime folks really should read the OP to understand the context of the thread.
Why should we be surprised?
Charles Martel would b**** slap the people running Euorpe and handing it over to the Muslim hoards.
1 Like
No … we were talking about older men married to teenage women coming to the USA from countries who’s law permits marriage at a younger age than we permit. You said their marriage should be invalidated and the man prosecuted for pedophilia. Germany never entered into that discussion.
I’m not sure where you are seeing that Samm? 
If I created confusion, my bad.
I got it from this:
There was no mention of Germany there or in the posts from WR and others you were responding to that drectly preceded those. I assumed that the topic had broadened beyond the OP, as it always does. I’m sorry that I misunderstood, but your statements are general in composition and could apply to the US or any other country.
So to be clear, are you saying that your position only apples to Germany and not to married immigrants who come to the US?
1 Like
Not speaking for DMK, but I think her comment is on topic in that we are discussing a country (Germany) and its bending of existing law (required age for legal marriage) to accommodate those who believe otherwise (Muslims).
In each defined country a codified law is to be followed. Our law against marrying young girls applies to marriages performed here. Likely Germany’s law is similar and applies only to marriages performed in Germany.
What the judge in Germany has done is to circumvent the law to appease the Muslims men that wish to marry children.
I think DMK is saying that the laws of any country should trump the culture of immigrants to that country. This is certainly true in the case of murder in the USA and should be true regarding the age of marriage.
If an old man with a child bride moves here (or to Germany) already legally married in another country, the marriage should be recognized. If such a couple desires to GET MARRIED here (or in Germany) they should be denied…in accordance with the law.
1 Like
I can see the confusion as topics do broaden.
In spirit of broadening:
My position applies to any country in that the laws of said country should not be changed to accomodate a different culture.
In taking it a step further, even if legally married in a foreign country, once a citizen a marriage should be annulled until the legal age of consent has been reached.
I have a difficulty with the concept that in our country we can convict and imprison a person for having relations with someone below the age of consent while on the other hand allow the same to be recognized because laws, not our own, are recognized.
Actually, aside from the last paragraph, you did speak for me an did it well!
Then you have trouble with the Constitution. If there is such a discrepancy in our law vs. theirs regarding marriage and the age of consent, they should not be allowed to immigrate. But as was pointed out before, there is a wide range of age of consent to marry within our own country. Remember Jerry Lee Lewis? He legally married his 13-yr-old cousin.
What I have trouble with is the inconsistency. It is admittedly black and white thinking on my part.
If an American citizen you may not. If married in a foreign country, you may.
No, the UK is a police state with a democratic veneer, the best con ever successfully delivered.
Actually it is entirely up to each State individually to determine the age of majority for marriage. The Feds have no say in it. If, for example, one State allows marriage at 13, that marriage is valid in States that 16 is the minimum age. That is where the Feds have a say.
You are correct on all counts, Samm.
My issue is arranged marriages are more than likely not consensual and are not a part of our culture.
Semantics. In many countries, arranged marriages are consensual. They are accepted by one and all as traditional and customary.
We are not many countries.
Nor should the traditions of any country trump our laws and culture.
How we possibly view Ford vs Kavanaugh or the #meetoo movement seriously while at the same time condoning a child bride?
But we are many States. And marriages performed under the variety of laws governing the age of marriage participants in each State are valid in all States. The same standard is applied to marriages in other countries. It would be unconscionable to invalidate the marriages of legal visitors from other countries just because their law differs from that of any or all of the States.
We are not speaking of legal visitors. We are speaking of individuals who wish to become citizens of this country.
Uh … they are legal visitors too.
I’m not sure what you mean. To me, visitor is temporary. Citizen is permanent.