Muslims Anxiously Awaiting Polygamy’s Legalization in Canada

Just when you think that Canada’s multicultural mess can’t get any worse, something new always comes up. The case in question this time are the court proceedings going on in Bountiful, British Columbia. The judge must decide whether the small rogue Mormon sect there has the right to practice polygamy.

If you think that this is an exotic story worthy only of an HBO show like Big Love, about Bill Henrickson and his three wives, think again.

The trial is anxiously watched by an influential part of the Muslim community in Canada, which desperately wants to make polygamy an integral part of the Canadian life.


Canada’s bright polygamous future

Winnipeg Free Press, which made the story public (with information from The Canadian Press), quotes an interview with imam Aly Hindi and he is not ashamed or concerned about his opinion at all:

Aly Hindi, an outspoken imam at Salaheddin Islamic Centre in Scarborough, Ont., said there are more than 200 polygamous Muslim marriages in the Greater Toronto Area alone. The figure is impossible to verify as polygamy among Muslim and other immigrant groups in Canada is often shrouded in mystery.

Hindi believes banning polygamy is harmful to women.

“If the three adults — the husband, the first wife and (the other) women — have consent, I don’t think the government should interfere in this,” Hindi said in a telephone interview.

By disallowing polygamy, the government is encouraging affairs, he told The Canadian Press.

“This is unjust law drawn by men who do not want to carry responsibility for the second woman,” Hindi said.

Hindi would not say how many polygamous marriages he has officiated at, but he did say that he has witnessed marriages where both women celebrated the relationship, contrary to popular views of polygamy.

Advocates say polygamy is justified in the Qur’an and the Prophet Muhammad himself is often cited as an example of being able to marry more than one woman. According to Surat al Nisaa, the “Book of Women” in the Islamic holy book, it is permissible to marry up to four women.

So we have here a “cleric” who openly admits that he and other Muslims in Canada have broken the law. Since when the ramblings of a medieval desert war lord supersede the Canadian common law, which guarantees equal rights to all individuals?

Am I too naïve thinking that everybody who advocates and gets involved into a practice, which is prohibited by the Canadian law should face the consequences in court?

Does that mean that now Muslims will be getting four welfare cheques, instead of one? In the dhimmi Great Britain they are already able to extort that much from the taxpayers.

Where is the federal government to investigate that blatant violation of the law, openly admitted by the arrogant imam? Never mind, Harper is not going to rock the boat by trying to go against multiculturalism…

Where is McGuinty? I forgot, he is busy erecting electricity-making windmills in the lake.

Where are “Taliban” Jack Layton and his wife Olivia? They’d rather let people marry their goats than losing even one “multicultural” vote.

Where are the “moderate” Muslims, who love Canada and respect her laws? There are none. Everybody is chasing people like Tarek Fatah, who dare criticize the cult…

That’s how things will work from now on – every custom established by desert savages will overwrite the Canadian law.

Hey, Canada, is anybody still thinking here?

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. dailyrasp says:

    Our immigration policy is hurting Canada in the long run.

    1. admiwrath says:

      You bet…

  2. jane says:

    Don’t deny Muslims the same opportunities that Saskatchewan gives people qwho want multiple same time spouses. Below isd quote from Saskatchewan justice minister.
    “In Saskatchewan it is possible to enter into a spousal relationship without that relationship being solemnized under The Marriage Act, 1995. The Family Property Act provides framework to deal with situations where spousal relationships overlap in time. This most commonly occurs when two people married under The Marriage Act, 1997 separate without going through the formal divorce procedures for a number of years. The separated spouses may enter into new common law spousal relationships prior to the finalization of the divorce of the previous marriage.”

    Read above, …divorce not required to be eligible for new spouse!

    1. admiwrath says:

      I am not sure what your point is, but the situation you describe is nothing like the situation of a Muslim welfare parasite getting four cheques for each of his four wives.

  3. jane says:

    Actually, if governments dont recognize multiple spouses, then four cheques are NOT possible. That is the point exactly.

  4. Rita says:

    ALL Canadians deserve the same rights as Saskatchewan people. Polygamy is legal there and therefore should be legal across all of Canada.

  5. Caine says:

    Rita, if Saskatchewan allows polygamy, the people who authorize it should go to prison.

    1. AnnMarie says:

      It is Grand Theft Larceny to take other people’s, taxpayers money and use it without permission of the people/taxpayers. I know I wasn’t asked if I wanted my taxes used in this way.

      The penalty in the past was death. grand larceny

      n. the crime of theft of another’s property (including money) over a certain value (for example, $500), as distinguished from petty (or petit) larceny in which the value is below the grand larceny limit. Some states only recognize the crime of larceny, but draw the line between a felony (punishable by state prison time) and a misdemeanor (local jail and/or fine) based on the amount of the loot. (See: larceny, theft)

      The amount of the so-called loot would be in the billions over the years. Millions given away over the years to other foreigners.

      I’m sure that in time the payback will be dished out. #trumpforpresident

  6. Jeryd says:

    Heh Caine,
    I lived in Saskatchewan and they do allow polygamy in the sense married people can have multiple spouses under the law. They are the only place in North America to allow polygamy as far as I know. Their laws aren’t about “previous” spouses having lasting rights under the law, they are about sanctioning multiple same time spouses. Polygamy is alive in Canada!

  7. The Lone Ranger says:

    This madness has already infected the UK, including – tragically – my native Scotland.

    Daily Mail, April 05, 2008

    When it comes to avoiding a ban for speeding, the courts hear every excuse in the book.
    But yesterday one motorist offered what must be a unique reason why he should keep his licence.
    Mohammed Anwar said a ban would make it difficult to commute between his two wives and fulfil his matrimonial duties.
    His lawyer told a Scottish court the Muslim restaurant owner has one wife in Motherwell and another in Glasgow – he is allowed up to four under his religion – and sleeps with them on alternate nights.
    He also needed his driving licence to run his restaurant in Falkirk, Stirlingshire.
    Airdrie Sheriff Court had heard that Anwar was caught driving at 64mph in a 30mph zone in Glasgow, fast enough to qualify for instant disqualification.
    Anwar admitted the offence, but Sheriff John C. Morris accepted his plea not to be banned and allowed him to keep his licence.
    Instead, he was fined £200 and given six penalty points.
    Lorna Jackson, from the road safety charity Brake, called the decision “astonishing”.
    She said: “Regardless of the number of wives or businesses this man drives to, he broke a law which is there to protect everyone.
    “Travelling just a few miles over the limit in a 30mph zone can be the difference between life and death if you hit someone, let alone driving at more than twice the speed limit.
    “Drivers know the law, and they know the punishment they could face when they break it.
    “For the courts to allow someone to keep their licence when they have so blatantly flouted the law and put peoples’ lives at risk, on the basis of an excuse such as this, is astonishing.”
    Anwar, wearing a suit and an open-neck shirt, had made no comment during his five-minute court appearance, apart from confirming his identity.
    But last night, speaking from his restaurant Sanam, he said: “It is true I have two wives.
    “Muslim men are allowed up to four. But I am not a religious leader and it is not my place to comment.
    “As a matter of respect to my wives I would not comment on my home life.
    “The sheriff did not ban me because I need my licence to run my business, although my wives were also part of the decision.”
    The court had heard that Anwar was on his way home from Falkirk to his Glasgow wife on August 21, 2007, when he was caught by city police using a hand-held speed camera.
    His lawyer, Paul Nicolson, said: “He realises his licence is at risk, but this is an unusual case and is very anxious to keep his driving licence.
    “He has one wife in Motherwell and another in Glasgow and sleeps with one one night and stays with the other the next on an alternate basis.
    “Without his driving licence he would be unable to do this on a regular basis.
    “He is also a restaurant owner and has a restaurant in Falkirk, which he has had for the past 30 years.
    “He has had a clean driving licence until now, and on this particular evening was on his way home after a busy evening at his restaurant.”
    Anwar’s successful plea joins a long list of unusual excuses heard in the courts down the years.
    Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson was cleared of illegally driving on a motorway hard shoulder because he said he was rushing to a toilet.
    David Beckham also escaped a ban after arguing he had to break the speed limit to escape a photographer.

    Read more:

  8. Erica says:

    I see and hear nothing but married people having affairs left. right and centre. It’s practically an epidemic. It seems monogamy is no longer the norm. The fact is, men have very strong libidos– mother nature intended it that way (and so do lots of women). Both wives and husbands commonly have emotional issues with their spouses that lead to affairs. Some affairs are just about the sex, others are based on falling in love with another person other than your spouse. It’s called being human, though many don’t think it is civil and consider it an unfortunate problem that us humans have been struggling with since we lived in caves. It’s a very complicated issue– nothing black or white about it.

    I think there is an element of anti-Muslim sentiment that further incenses Canadians with the idea of polygamy. Since Canadians do not have this cultural background, it is, of course, even shocking and distressing to most of us, the thought of a woman having to accept that her husband, who supposedly married her because he loves her, is going to be emotionally bonded with another woman and having sexual relations with her. Whether polygamy is legal or not, how the wife will feel and the emotional consequences to her will be the same. I don’t know enough about what goes on in the heads of Canadian-Muslim women to know whether or not, because they have been “raised” to accept all the aspects of the religion of Islam, including the right of their husband to have up to three more wives, if they are okay with this. If the consensus among Canadian-Muslim women is that they are indeed okay with it, are they just saying that because if they speak out about this particular injustice, they will be in serious trouble within their own community? I am, as delicately as possible bringing up the issue of violence against Muslim women, which can be perpetrated against them for the slightest little thing. At least that’s the perception non-Muslims have. This is interesting, considering that domestic violence, sexual assault and sexism in the workplace, etc. is alive and well in our culture as well. No, we do not stone women to death for cheating on their husbands. Are Muslim women abused any more or less than Canadian women for standing up for themselves within their marriage? I’m sure most non-Muslims are certain of that as it is a regular issue in the media.

    Westerners/Canadians have quite a bit of evidence that Muslim women, whether they live in a non Muslim society or whether they live in an Arab country, have a considerably different life experience than non-Muslim women in respect to what freedoms and rights they have. Although Islam would deny it, Muslim woman are anything but liberated like woman here in North America and many other countries.

    If polygamy is legalized in Canada, among many issues this will bring up, will be the treatment of Muslim woman within the Muslim culture. Are they “forced” to wear hijab or do they want to? No one has yet to give us a straight answer about that and indeed, some Muslim woman do not wear hijab. So will polygamy be yet another thing “forced” upon them?

    The non-Muslim, non-Islamic world has long held strong condemnation of the oppression of Muslim women so understandably some of us would rather see the complete opposite happen– that no Muslim woman ever be subjected to any law or religious law that serves to oppress her. Here in North America and other parts of the world, woman have fought tooth and nail for women’s rights and polygamy is an affront to that. We instinctively want to protect all women, including Muslim women, from what we see as something entirely archaic.

    Having said that, married men are always going to have affairs. Whether they do it “legally” because the second, third or fourth woman is actually now their wife and not their mistress, from an emotional standpoint of the wife, it makes no difference.

    But marriage is a legal contract, regardless of what is going on emotionally. Perhaps there is the perception that Muslim men with multiple wives will be able to take advantage of this great country of ours and profit from having legal marriages to four women. Exactly how would they do that? If anything, it would be a considerable financial burden to take care of four wives. But do we really know if that is their only motive or are they genuinely and strictly following the edicts of their culture and religion?

    If Americans and Canadians emigrated by the thousands to a Muslim country, would the citizens of that country accept that we are going to keep our own cultural practices and beliefs or would they expect us to adopt Muslim practices and beliefs? They could be insisting that we engage in polygamy and that all Western women wear hijab if living in their culture the same way we are insisting that they engage in monogamy while living in our culture.

    Multiculturalism has a long way to go. Prejudice, fear, misunderstanding and the desire to “fix” a perceived wrong is going to be a dividing wall between all cultures for many years to come. The fact is, as much as it seems white, English-speaking, Christians rule the world and therefore, every other person on the planet must live as we do (otherwise you’re a barbaric heathen or religious extremist), we do not rule the world.

    1. admiwrath says:

      “Erica”, I admire your stupidity. In your long comment you provided all the arguments we need to justify the criticim of muslim barbarism.

  9. Erica says:


    Yes, how stupid of me to forget that not one single incident of barbarism has EVER been committed in the name of Christianity or any other religion besides Islam!

  10. Erica says:

    There are so many references to polygamy in the Bible, the list would be longer than my long comment.

    Why do you care so much about the marital status of foreigners, who pretty much keep to themselves anyway? Oh, that’s right, admiwrath– you must be one of those “white, English-speaking Christians” who think they rule the world.

    How stupid of me (again)!

    1. admiwrath says:

      Yes fake “Erica”, there are many references to polygamy in the Bible, but the Muslim cult is the only one that still practices it. Of course I care about the marital status of foreigners – if they want to live in Canada they must comply with the Canadian laws, otherwise they are free to go to “nice” countries like Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan where their barbaric customs are the norm. If you don’t realize that, you are really stupid.

  11. Erica says:

    Actually, Erica is my real name. Who would pick Erica as a fake name? You really like to call people stupid, don’t you? It’s your default setting. You should expand your vocabulary but you probably don’t have time, what with your ruling the world and everything.

    I made a mistake posting that first comment in your blog. I did so without first checking out the character of the person who has this blog. If I had, I would have moved along. I do not associate with people haters. I have had the displeasure of catching up on your many hateful rants against Islam. Though I could not find anything definitive that indicates you are Jewish, it seems that you are. You stated in one blog (or a comment) that at least 22 of your ancestors have been killed by Muslims. Really? I’m sure everybody has ancestors who were murdered, and I’m sure some of them were killed by Muslims, or gee, I don’t know, maybe Christians or Jews or atheists. So you condemn two billion people (I believe that’s roughly how many Muslims there are on Earth, but seeing as I’m so stupid, I probably have that statistic wrong) who have absolutely nothing to do with 22 murders that occurred in the past? That’s messed up.

    You contradict yourself. Unfortunately I jotted this down without making note of which of your rants it came from. “The only thing that would make me happy is to see one day that absolutely everybody is treated in absolutely the same way under absolutely the same laws.” What?!!! Does that include Muslims or did you forget to add, “…except for Muslims who should burn in Hell” which seems to be your banal mantra.

    In “Muslim Brutes Deface Toronto Synagogue”, you quote Rabbi Jarrod Grover: “…we remain vulnerable so long as the world is still plagued by religious arrogance, intolerance and hatred.” Would he be referring to your arrogance and your intolerance and your hatred of Muslims? Hmm…

    If it makes you feel good about yourself, you can call me stupid again. I know exactly who I am and I’m nothing like you, for which I am grateful. Encountering unfortunate souls such as yourself reminds me of who I really am. Thank you. Now that I know “what” you are, I will not be checking back here for your response.

    Quite Content aka Erica

    1. admiwrath says:

      You are not stupid, you are one of the trusty foot soldiers of Iran or Saudi Arabia, charged with the task to turn Canada into a an Islamic hellhole.

      The whole problem, Muslim Erica, is that the Muslims don’t treat other religions as equal. Those savages killed so many of their own in Afghanistan over burning of that wicked book named Koran. Have you, my righteous Muslim friend, heard about anybody being killed over a Christian Bible? Yet the pathetic Muslim savages destroy Bibles every day.

      And what are you going to say about the leader of those Afghanistani cavemen, Karzai, who yesterday agreed with a law that the women in Afghanistan would be officially considered second class citizens? And that is happening right now, not with 22 people long time ago. Your primitive cult is truly disgusting, please keep it out of Canada. (If you enjoy being beaten by your husband, that’s a totally differnt issue.)

      A piece of friendly advice: if you feel an urge to push yoour Muslim agenda, you can freely use the thousands of Saudi Arab websites designed to blackmail the Western civilization (or you can try Toronto Star, it’s basically the same shithole).

  12. Erica says:

    “Your comment is awaiting moderation”

    Actually, I will check back to see if you post my comment. If you don’t, it means you’re a bully who doesn’t want anyone to know someone wasn’t in the least bit intimidated by you.

    1. admiwrath says:

      Nice try, I have never been intimidated by fanatical idiots. If you want to destroy me, don’t do it on may blog, the inbread Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would be happy to support your cause.

  13. Jack Black says:

    1st)They shouldn’t be allowed to drain the system if they are immigrants. 2nd) If they are involved in polygamy they should be deported to a Muslim country (whole family) and the Cleric should be deported as well. 3rd)All assets should be seized, and auctioned off to replenish the system that they have taken advantage of. 4rth) Please watch “Three Stages of Jihad” on YouTube and inform everyone you know. thanks.

  14. Stephanie says:

    Why would you come to a country and expect to legalize parts of your religion that you see as “holy?” Under what circumstance is it okay to apply your polygamist ways to a country you do NOT originate from? Money isn’t everything to the Canadian government and I would hope that this doesn’t pass. Your culture is bright and some of the things are fascinating, but the women in your culture are oppressed. Perhaps the “unholy” life style in the west prevents us Westerners from seeing the odd ways of your culture, but having multiple wives is not okay. A woman is person with EQUAL rights. God see’s that. The God of Abraham is the same God that loves me. It is the God that I serve and I believe that marriage was meant for one. And a woman is rightfully human with every right as a man. Marriage is for one. Not three. No two or more.

  15. Irfan says:

    May the peace and blessings of God be Upon All of you.

    I think that you all make equally valid points. Erica I cheer you on. I don’t know if you are Muslim or not but your comments were well said.

    Mr. Admiwrath you have made a valid point in that regardless of ones’ faith or lack thereof one must follow the laws of the land. However with that said, you go off on a tangent and don’t stay on topic!

    Now here is my two cents worth, it seems perfectly ok for men and women to sleep around and cheat on their spouses resulting in broken families and bitter divorces that tie up the courts that I think are way more costly than any welfare check that it seems is your default argument.

    I would like to think that if a man can have more than one wife, there is a very good chance that he is able to support his household as that is part of the pre-requisite to having more than one wife!

    One of the issues you failed to mention is that we are allowed to have same sex spouses and all the variations thereof, this group have all the same rights as everyone else so why Canada which professes itself as an open and welcoming country to all races/religions/creed/sexual orientation etc. have a major hangup with multiple wives? Oh, I think I know why, they won’t be lining up for multiple welfare checks!

    You also fail to highlight the recent Jewish break away group which came under scrutiny for their elliptical practices. I wonder how many wives/family members from this group were collecting multiple checks!

    Anyways Mr. Wrath, I know this is your blog and you have control if you will publish this or not but I hope I have at least got you all to think as opposed to just having this narrow worldview of Muslims or whoever else they might be as being a people who are in line to collect a welfare check!

    You refer to Muslims as being people who belong to a cult but yet I think a better more effective representation of a cult would be the splinter Jewish splinter group who I spoke about earlier.

    Anyways, like I said this is your blog and you have the final say of what gets published and of course whatever your response might be which you have ample time to mull over.

    Wishing you a splendid day,

    Irfan with one wife in Canada

  16. Pareto says:

    It appears that a purely personal issue has been portrayed as a war between religions. From a pragmatic perspective keeping more than one wife is very difficult for any individual due to associated high maintenance and social costs of two spouses. Even in Muslim countries less than 0.005% Muslim men have more than one wife. So even if polygamy is allowed in Canada, it’s economic and social consequences will be negligible always. I believe Islam does not force polygamy, rather it allows it on a need basis with full emphasis on social equality between the spouses, and that may be acceptable to all rational persons.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *