THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

ST. LOUIS — Three years after the St. Louis Blues retired Brett Hull’s No. 16 jersey, they honoured him again for his recent induction into the Hockey Hall of Fame.

“They’re probably sick of seeing me,” Hull said Tuesday night before a ceremony that also honoured his Blues dream team. “But I love being back. This is probably the last time I’ll be on that ice, and it’s going to be a great feeling.

“It doesn’t matter if you’re scoring a goal or standing there in a suit, for them to cheer it’s the greatest feeling ever.”

Hull received a standing ovation from the sellout crowd before the Blues played the Calgary Flames, the team that traded him to St. Louis in 1987. Wayne Gretzky, Brendan Shanahan and Curtis Joseph were among former teammates in attendance.

The Blues announced they had commissioned a statue of Hull that will join likenesses of Bernie Federko and Al MacInnis outside the Scottrade Center.

“The St. Louis Blues will be indelibly stamped on my heart until the day they bury me in this ground,” Hull told the crowd. “You’ve got a world class organization and they are going to lead you to where you want to be, and to where we all wanted to be.”

Hull’s decade with the Blues ended on a sour note following repeated clashes with then coach Mike Keenan. One fan shouted, “I hate Mike Keenan!” during a brief pause during Hull’s speech.

Hull said he and Keenan met this summer and cleared the air.

“I’m way too old. I don’t hold grudges,” Hull said. “We had a great talk. I always said this: ‘I hated him as a coach, but he’s a really good human being.’ I’ve got no problem with Mike anymore.”

Hull couldn’t resist taking a shot at Keenan’s coaching philosophy. Keenan converted Hull, who scored 72, 86 and 70 goals in a three-season span beginning in 1989-90, to play a two-way game.

“I’ll go to my grave saying he didn’t have a clue to what he was doing,” Hull said. “I never understood what he was doing, and it showed, I think, in what happened. If you look at the record and the people that went in and out and how things ended up, I think you’ll see that.”

Hull won the Stanley Cup twice as a player, with Detroit and Dallas. Now an executive vice-president with the Stars, he is trying to win it a third time.

“It’s the hardest thing in sports to do,” Hull said. “It’s not like you can just say you’re going to do it. We have Joe Nieuwendyk as our GM now, and I think he’s a guy that knows what he’s doing, and we’re going to get ‘er done.”

Despite Hull’s prolific scoring, the Blues never made it past the second round of the playoffs during his time with the franchise.

“I’m not going to get all dreamy and say we were on the cusp because you never know,” Shanahan said. “We all wished we won one here, but it just wasn’t meant to be.”

Joseph knows it wasn’t Hull’s fault.

“I’m glad I didn’t have to play against him during those heydays,” he said.

Pennant happy in SpainMarkov working towards early return to Habs

“I will honour Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year.”

- Charles Dickens

Photo by VC Ferry

All Rights Reserved

© 2009

A show jumping gold medallist is honoured by the British Equestrian Writers’ Association…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: fashion diamond jewelry. The blog is also related to: diamond silver jewelry.

One of the appurtenances of the office of law-maker in Nigeria is being addressed as an honourable member of a state house of assembly or national assembly. It is a heritage from the British colonial government and a property of the parliamentary system of government. In this tradition, members of society who are experienced and have excelled in various fields of endeavour and who are of standing are elected into the parliament to make laws for the good governance of their region or the entire country. While in the House of Commons members address themselves as ‘Honourable Member’ and have the title ‘Honourable’ appended to their names.

I really do not know the history behind the title, but I believe it must be related to the character of members of parliament. Honour, in itself, denotes high standards of character. This means that the title relates either to the level of character which members bring to the parliament or that which they exhibit while in parliament or both. In a manner of speaking, therefore, honourable members live up to their name. Anything dishonourable must be eschewed – or so it seems. But what happens to a parliament in which is found dishonour? What happens to the title ‘honourable’? Can a member of such a parliament or the entire parliament continue to append the appellation ‘honourable’ to its name?

I have read and heard of members of parliament in some countries who resigned when they felt or were made aware that their honour had been tainted. These gentlemen, in character, did the honourable thing and bowed out in the midst of established or perceived dishonour hovering around their names, showing that the appellation ‘honourable’ was never misplaced in the first place. But I am yet to read or hear of it happening in these parts. If it has happened, it is yet to become the practice. Now, why is that?

I believe that any mature adult in any society knows what honour and dishonour mean. My readings in anthropology have shown me that, with minor differences, the things which are honourable are the same in all societies. Things such as valour, veracity, loyalty, altruism, service to fatherland and being law-abiding, which, in the case of parliamentarians, includes following due process, are honourable. On the contrary, cowardice, mendacity, disloyalty, egotism, greed, avarice, and lawlessness are dishonourable. It is important to establish this fact so that those who excuse our law-makers on the ground that they are in the learning process or any such-like excuse know that they and the law-makers are being mischievous. They know in their heart of hearts that they are doing something wrong and have no excuse. They are simply being dishonourable.

Apart from the continual brawling and shouting among members of our   National Assembly and various Houses of Assembly and the numerous allegations of bribery and corruption, one matter in which our assemblymen have displayed character that is less than honourable is the matter of impeachment. As a constitutional provision, impeachment is meant to be used to check the excesses of the executive public office holder. The House of Assembly is vested with the power to impeach an executive who has been found guilty of gross misconduct. Again, as in the case of what is honourable or dishonourable, it can be safely assumed that any mature adult member of society should be able to know what constitutes gross misconduct. That is why in our constitution gross misconduct is defined as a grave violation or breach of the provision of the constitution or a misconduct of such nature as amounts in the opinion of the House of Assembly to gross misconduct. However, the activities of our Houses of Assembly have shown that the constitution makes an unsafe assumption in regard to the ability of our law-makers to form mature, independent and unbiased opinion of what constitutes gross misconduct. Even when members of the public cannot see what really the offence of the public office holder is, the legislators remain bull-headed in their rush to serve selfish political ends. Impeachment has now been turned into a vindictive tool – a way of punishing political opponents or anyone who refuses to play ball in the looting game. Afterwards, the legislators come out to tell us that it was all done in our interest, but we continue to fail to see how our interest is served, for, in some instances, it is the very person who is serving our interest that these men conspire to remove from office! Then there is the issue of due process.

It is at once disturbing and interesting that in recent times almost all cases of impeachment by our legislators have been overturned by the courts. In most of them due process was never followed, according to the courts. In their mad rush to achieve revenge, the law-makers ride rough-shod over the provisions of the constitution they claim to be defending. It is not enough that these men cannot form solid opinion of what constitutes misconduct but they must add illegality to the process! And what peeves many of us is the willfulness of it all. Even when one or more Houses of Assembly’s impeachment has been overturned, another one goes ahead to impeach someone following the same flawed process and consequently gets its own impeachment overturned.

Now, tell me, where is the honour in carrying on this way? Where is the honour in framing people up? Where is the honour in serving selfish rather than public interest, especially when you have been chosen to serve the public interest? Where is the honour in breaking the law when you are a law-maker? In truth, there is no honour in any of those; rather, there is dishonour, shame and ignominy. And, if you ask me, I think that the honourable status of our law-makers needs to be reviewed. We just cannot continue this way. We can do one of two things: we can either divest our law-makers of their honourable status or we compel them to be worthy of their status failing which we recall them from the honourable house. They simply cannot have it both ways. They cannot continue to behave dishonourably and still continue to enjoy honourable status. The first option seems more viable; the second option seems less so. And that is because the people are too preoccupied to exercise their power of recall. They consider it too expensive and time-consuming, and our law-makers are taking advantage of it. A hapless and preoccupied electorate is just what our law-makers need to kick over the traces and continue to perpetrate all kinds of dishonourable acts.

Question: Do people need to be honourable to be able to make laws? Answer: Absolutely not! All over the world and through the ages plain criminals and law-breakers have been known to make laws and even to compel others to obey them. Dictators, coup plotters, and other usurpers of power and authority have all made laws in human history. Some of their laws even stand the test of time. So what’s with this issue of honour which is to be ascribed, of necessity, to law-making? If honour has to be ascribed to a law-maker then let it not be a property of his office but of his character. Honour has to be earned and determined as earned by the people, not by some (alien) institution or tradition. But if it is  a property of the office, let the occupant be willing and ready to forfeit the office whenever his honour is called to question, as he is no longer worthy of the office. Failing that let him be impeached!

Our law-makers may have impeached the chief executives of their states but they stand impeached in their motives and, therefore, in their honour – by the tribunal of public opinion, of course! So said, their continued enjoyment of the appellation should be no consolation: It is simply a case of being dressed in borrowed (stolen) robes; in which case it becomes dishonourable to be called honourable!

Sebastian. ‘Scape being drunk, for want of wine.

Gonzalo. I’ th’ commonwealth I would by contraries Execute all things: for no kind of traffic Would I admit; no name of magistrate; Letters should not be known; wealth, poverty, And use of service, none; contract, succession, Bourn, bound of land, tilth, vineyard, none; No use of metal, corn, or wine, or oil; No occupation, all men idle, all, And women too; but innocent and pure: No sov’reignty.

 Sebastian. And yet he would be king on’t. Antonio. The latter end of his commonwealth forgets the beginning.

Gonzalo. All things in common nature should produce Without sweat or endeavour. Treason, felony, Sword, pike, knife, gun, or need of any engine Would I not have; but nature should bring forth, Of its own kind, all foison, all abundance To feed my innocent people!

 Sebastian. No marrying ‘mong his subjects?

Antonio. None, man; all idle; whores and knaves.

Gonzalo. I would with such perfection govern, sir, T’ excel the golden age. Sebastian. Save his majesty!

These lines are taken from one of Shakespeare´s last plays, “The Tempest”. Gonzalo, the wise counsellor to the King speaks some strange ideas about society and how people ought to be governed. In reality this is what the Modern World has endeavoured to strive for. These are the principles on which Republics and Democracies have founded themselves on.

A “free society”, one in which no one must marry or pledge allegiance to any lord or king who might act tyrannically sounds like a just one. What really happens though is exactly that which Antonio mockingly suggests: that all men become knaves (deceitful and unreliable) and all women whores.

We already know in our western world that “all politicians are liars”. This is plain fact in democratic nations, because all elected politicians are always shamed and brought to disgrace over one thing or another. There is no honour in representation and democracy because there is no honour in making promises that cannot and will not ever be fulfilled; (the only way that anyone gets elected).

The same element of “lowest common denominator” is exactly as described by Shakespeare´s character Antonio. With no marrying, there is no honour between men and women, and in essence they are simply demoted to the same status as animals. Antonio says whores and knaves.

The idea that one can pledge oneself to another person, or to one´s country and king is one that instills in a person loyalty. In our modern democratic world it appears that marriage is no longer taken seriously, men and women live with each other and in essence fuck each other, and they are fucking whores and knaves (liars). There is no loyalty between people and there is no sense of familial tie in a democratic state, because women and men will sell themselves and betray each other just as the politician will betray the people who elect him.

I the author of this little proposition am a firm believer in fate and in destiny. Looking back over the Ancient Republics these always spurred expansion for the civilisations which took them up. But inevitably all Republics of old became kingdoms or empires. And the world republic in which we now live will also become an Empire simply because the expansion which it has undergone since its foundation in the late 18th century cannot continue and will not continue.

The fate of illegitimacy and dishonour is to strive for and become honourable. Power will always seek to justify itself, and it can only ever truly justify itself once it becomes sacred. This is not so much about freedom, as it is about LOYALTY, about giving yourself over to one person rather than selling out to whoever offers you something better on the spur of the moment.

 The monarchies which currently exist in our world are all but a laughing stock. They have no power whatsoever. The democracies which reign supreme are obviously guided by reason and by logical thinking, but in the end they are not loyal to anyone, they exist for no-one which is why they are simply corruptible. There is and must be a natural order to things in this world. The natural order comes from one supreme thought which is also one God.

There is one destiny and one fate. This fate is governed by God. Once we acknowledge that there is only one rightful king, the same way that there is one rightful mother and one rightful father and in terms one rightful husband or wife, and that to be disloyal, to search after different ones is to overthrow the will of God. If we were loyal we would cease to be whores and knaves. If we were loyal, the sacred rites which are afforded in life would be respected and our children would not grow up bastardised by their parents lack of loyalty to one person or one idea.

Well, there we are again; another sleepless night.

Though this blog is down as being posted at half eleven in the evening, it is actually five in the morning as I write this. FIVE IN THE MORNING. I’m really sick of going to bed at a ridiculous time and waking up at midday. I suppose I could try and tough it out for 24 hours, but… well then I’ll just feel horrible. I’d rather get the sleep.

I spent the last few hours researching heraldry; I need to look into it but I think I may well be entitled to a coat of arms. Contrary to popular belief (as I have recently discovered) a coat of arms is not something you have a right to by having a certain surname, it is the right of individuals (not families), and can only be passed directly down the legitimate male line (except for extreme exceptions… like the Queen); in order to attain the right to bear a coat of arms in England and Wales (Scotland is a WHOLE other matter) one must provide proof of inheritance enough to satisfy The College of Arms. You can also apply to them for new armitage, if you aren’t entitled to any, and if you’re one of the very few they grant it to it’ll only set you back by five to ten thousand quid.

I’m not sure where I’m going with this really, but I found it interesting. I’ve been thinking a lot recently about the nature of inheritance; not of money or of property, but of family; duty and obligation. I’ve been thinking about what it all means, about the point that Prince Hal becomes Henry V.

The eldest son of an eldest son of an eldest son of… I have no idea how far back it goes. It’s a little strange really, to think of yourself as part of a lineage; to think that a name isn’t yours, it’s your families. It’s something people have killed and died for, something people have honoured and revered, something that (in some cases) has followed directly from father to son for hundreds, thousands of years. You have a responsibility to your name. To do it justice, to keep it respected, to further it’s repute – dishonour it and, archaic as it may sound, you dishonour every single ancestor that wore it before you, and every single descendant that ever will.

Intense stuff. Overwhelming, some might say.

Perhaps if more people felt a sense of pride and responsibility for their name, they’d think twice before making a fool of themselves; think twice before passing out drunk in gutters; think twice before hurling abuse at passers by; think twice before throwing a punch at the man whose face you don’t like. Perhaps if people had something to care about, anything, they might have a reason to… well, to try.

In any rehab programme they teach the importance of believing in something greater than yourself – be it religion, the family unit, a career, a vocation, a love – whatever; something greater. Without the thought that there is something that transcends you, without the thought that there’s something greater which is worth the sacrifice, which means that no matter how much you screw up all is not lost, without that all that’s left is you, and for an awful lot of people that isn’t enough.

Now religion’s no longer what it once was amongst the masses, the family unit is in tatters throughout so much of the land (or so the Daily Mail keeps telling us), careers and vocations have made way for Media Studies degrees and gap years, and love… well, divorce rates are up, marital affairs are up, paedophilia is up, teen pregnancies are up and rapes are up; ’nuff said. Under the circumstances are our Names not worth investing with some respect? As a Nation we must have a fair bit spare. Be it working to reclaim a name from shady ancestors, be it living up to the reputation of shining ones, or furthering the good work done by them so far, anyone with parents can respect a name – it’s already greater than the individual at birth. Why don’t we recognize this? They’re one of the few things we’ll always have, and one of the few things that’ll outlive us when we’re gone.

So all in all maybe it hasn’t been a wasted night. Maybe a four hour nocturnal introduction to heraldry could do us all more good than we know. Maybe not.

All I’d say, is that next time you’re being wild and instinctive, crazed and cantankerous, selfish, miserly, gluttonous, avaricious or just plain stupid, try and pause for a second and think on what you’re doing. Whether you’re treating that name you wear right.

Remember; you’re only keeping it warm for the next generation. Don’t leave a bad stain they’ll have to wash out.

-Cheers.

Jurors are told by a judge to put aside sympathy when they consider the alleged "honour killing" of a schoolgirl…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: instructional. The blog is also related to: become a teacher.

Pupils at a new 7.5m primary school completed under Aberdeen’s 3Rs project mark the move with a special performance…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: education school district. For a different topic see crowd levels at disneyworld. The blog is also related to: esl.

The Dubai debt crisis raises fundamental questions.

UK banks account for half the £60billion of global loans to the debt-laden emirate, new statistics show.

Well done British banks ….. loads of loans built on sand … I suppose the words “conservative” and “prudent” didn’t get printed in the Banking Terminology dictionary?

So Britain, that Global Giant of the banking world, has half the dodgy loans? British banks are therefore as daft as the rest of the world put together? (Can someone check my maths!)

Oh, and why exactly were the banks lending money to SORDID DICTATORSHIPS? Would we have lent billions to Hitler’s Germany in 1937? What on earth happened to ETHICS in the financial world? I suppose lending to POOR countries who need it rather than the nasty, venal, corrupt dictatorships of the Middle East was right off the radar?

There is an obsession with the “Human Rights” of immigrants and others in Britain, but a complete and utter turning of  blind eyes to the slavery going on in the Middle East, as if it doesn’t concern us because it’s in “another far-off country of which we know little”. (Neville Chamberlain’s shameful explanation of his inaction over Hitler’s annexation of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia in 1936.)

Sorry, but “No Man is an Island” …. we can’t sign the UN Declaration of Human Rights on the one hand and then blithely lend money (the PEOPLE’S money) to countries that are treating people so terribly.

I hope Dubai goes bankrupt and our cretinous banks with it so that we can start again with people’s banks that have a modicum of honour and decency and are prepared to invest in democracies, not insanely greedy property developments based on dictators’ idle fantasies.

It wasn’t much different with Sadaam Hussein, whatever you think of the invasion. This was a man who – just to take one example – gassed to death 5,000 innocent men, women and children in one single village alone. Yet countries in the “free world” were secretly queuing up to do deals with him. One British government MP even went there and shook his hand, the hand that consigned hundreds of thousands of people to a horrible death.

Ecology? Apart from anything else, Dubai’s carbon emissions are pro rata 250% higher than the US, so much power goes into air-conditioning and desalination. Once again, the left hand doesn’t know or care what the right hand is doing. A British minister tells us to stop eating meat to save the world while British banks simultaneously rush to finance a humongously-profligate and obscenely-elitist project in the desert.

I sometimes wonder if we really deserve to survive Global Warming. Will it be God’s way of cleansing the Earth of an aberrant experiment in free will?

By Chris Snuggs

Family, friends and lovers. You’re invited to acknowledge and celebrate the intimate union that your Mimi and Auggie have found with each other. As some of you may already know, we are expecting a physical manifestation of our love. As of right now, we don’t know what her name is, or how she will choose to grow, or how her environment will shape her, whether she truly will be a her, or a him.

Most of you will understand this invitation as a wedding invitation. Exciting! We understand that even in this time where we consider our ethics and knowledge advanced, and even after the powerful movements in the sixties and incredible revolutions in history, our wedding’s timing among many others do not fit our society’s ideals.

We are not especially devoted to religion itself, but rather, we try to dedicate ourselves to a spiritual connection to God (or whichever name you would like to use) outside of an institution. Because ultimately, I believe that we should learn to have a spiritual connection whether we are inside the confines of a religious meeting place or not. I forget who said this, but a Muslim said: “When we are in Mecca, it does not matter which direction we pray.” There is also a part in the bible I believe, about Moses and another man who did not give respect to God how Moses thought that God should be respected. But God told Moses, that it does not matter how someone gives their respect to God. I thank God for his Love and understanding and appreciation when someone is genuine when giving love. I believe that Auggie and I have been shown great love and mercy from everyone around us, and so we are fortunate to be able to give eachother that love that God have shown us. I believe that Adam and Eve was married by the highest Priest, God, Himself. If we are the descendants of Adam and Eve, I trust that the union between Auggie and I have already been blessed by God, so we do not see the need to ask a priest to do the honours while we still greatly respect his or her service to his or her morals.

I am grateful that the taxes we pay to the government allowed me to meet my family doctor, and the teachers who took their time to make sure I grew up to their highest standards. However, I do not see why a statement and money paid to the government is needed when the love that Auggie and I share have very little to do with the government besides saving on the taxes.

So here is the wedding invitation to announce and celebrate the love that Auggie and I shared from when we met each other till today.

Yesterday I had one of the most exciting moments of my entire life. I had the very great privilege to meet someone I have admired for as long as I can remember. He is one of the greats, an Elder – a true hero – an inspiration to millions. And he shook my hand and greeted me with genuine warmth and interest. As I sat in the VIP lounge at Botswana Airport and listened to him chatting and laughing with old friends, I couldn’t believe where I was. I was struck by the power and strength and humour and humanity that is Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu.
This morning, one of my colleagues and I went as guests of Bishop Mwamba to hear Archbishop Tutu give a keynote address to this week’s international conference on ethics, hosted by the University of Botswana, ‘Retrieving the Human Face of Science: Understanding Ethics and Integrity in Healthcare, Medicine and Research.’
It was wonderful. I knew this year was going to be filled with amazing experiences, but never in my wildest dreams did I think they would include an event like this. I never imagined I could be lucky enough to be in the same room as the Archbishop, never mind actually talk to him! But lucky I am… and here’s the picture to prove it.

Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, me and BOTUSA's Joseph Lockridge, who was even more excited than I was!

Today’s suggestion is about honouring a tree/s. This one is a little too much like tree worship for my liking, though the idea of preserving trees and planting more – greening the world – is an idea I greatly support.

The actual idea is about dressing up a tree with various decorations and the like in order to honour a tree.

A response to reading ‘365 Ways to Change the World,’ by Michael Norton

Soldiers who recently returned from Afghanistan receive their service medals during the Leeds United derby match against Huddersfield Town…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: world cup football. The blog is also related to: world soccer.

A girl of 21 years old approached me for pain in her left shoulder which has become immobile. This girl loved a person from a different caste. She was forced to stay in the house as their affair was not approved by her father.

I asked her to tell her background and narrate on what happened before she had the pain.  She broke down and said she is in love with a person and that person is good.

I told her, “Forget about your parents. Let us get an answer from the body. Even if the pain goes by 10%, then the body is confirming it”. 

She affirmed, ‘I am not worried about others as I believe that god is guiding me. God is guiding me to marry the person of my choice.’

As she said the affirmation few times, her pain went down quite a bit. This means her body is favoring the marriage. It says don’t worry about caste. Don’t worry about the approval of your marriage. God (through your body) is guiding you to marry him.  God is approving this marriage, why we need others’ approval. It is not necessary.

I asked her to honor the body by marrying her lover. She is happily married to that person now.

Left Shoulder Back Pain Indicates…

• When you are not appreciated or not recognized. 
• When you are put to shame
• When your actions are considered bad, regarded as incorrect, or not approved by others.

You will get pain initially. Then numbness will develop as more and more you go through those feelings.

DESIDERATA

(Written by Max Ehrmann in the 1920s)

Forty Royal Marines travel to Snowdonia to play football in memory of a colleague fatally injured in Afghanistan…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: travel to. The blog is also related to: birmingham flight.

Forty Royal Marines travel to Snowdonia to play football in memory of a colleague fatally injured in Afghanistan…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: soccer latest scores. The blog is also related to: europe soccer.

She was an 18 year old young lady. Orphaned at an early age, she was brought up by her maternal grandparents and uncles. Her dad deserted her to remarry a woman of his choice. A couple of years ago, she dropped out from school and joined a cotton factory. She was hard working. She had savings of about Rs 35,000/- within about 3 years of work. She was attracted to a nice co-worker of hers and desired to marry him. He too reciprocated her love.

All her maternal uncles were alcoholics. They wanted to dispose her off cheaply. They arranged her marriage with a man who was already divorced and was twice her age. She was not interested in this proposal at all. The groom asked her in private if she was interested. She agreed. She knew that her uncles were listening. One of her uncles had threatened to poison himself if she did not consent for the marriage.

The marriage was over within hours. It was time for the ‘first night’. She told her husband that she would not allow him to touch her. Both of them had arguments throughout the night. Of course she managed to protect herself.  By the way even if he had raped her, it would have been legal in India. Here marriage indicates permanent consent for sex. She created a scene the next morning telling everyone that she cannot live with him. The groom’s family was aghast. They had spent Rs 1,50,000/- on the marriage. They had borne all the expenses as it was not easy for him to get proposals because of divorcee status.

They took her to a Police Station. The relatives of the girl were there too. They gave in writing that she had given a consent. They also wrote that they will have nothing to do with her, if she walks out of the marriage. They did not want  any voice in her favor to surface. One of her uncles beat up his own father with a thick stick and bruised him in areas that cannot be seen easily. He kept the old man away from the Police station. Few other uncles thought it was good to take her to a psychiatrist, so that he can change her mind. That is how she landed in my office.

I admitted her to separate her from stressful zone. She was under pressure from all sides. Her grandfather stayed in the hospital as a caretaker. She came to know that all the money she had saved during her 3 years of work was used up by one uncle. When he took the money, he had told her that he would buy her golden jewelry. She had lost almost everything now.

Her newly married husband pursued her in the hospital. He paid her grandfather money to foot the bills. She was angry with her grandpa for accepting help from that guy. She knew that it could become a liability and restrict her freedom. Poverty and want pushed her grandpa to receive the money. He began to counsel her to change her mind. After all the groom was a benevolent man! They shared their room with a patient with Schizophrenia. The mother of the patient was a 70 year old lady who had faced much difficulties in life. She too started counseling her to reconsider her decision. She was of opinion that it is better to get married to a rich man who did not have vices (whatever be his age) than remain unmarried.

The girl was fed up with all these inputs. In the hospital she had respite from torture of her uncles. She began to think more clearly. I listened to her and gave her support. I gave her little advice to remain calm and not lose her temper when her husband came. We knew he would come. We knew if he walked away from marriage then all problems would be over. Next time when her husband visited her, she remained calm and chatted with him. She explained to him that he would not be happy with her, as she liked someone else. She told him that she respected him and felt bad about what he has gone through. He tried to convince her that they could start afresh. With time he realized that it was futile to try it if she has absolutely no feelings for him. He agreed for a divorce. I do not know if it can be called a divorce. What had happened was hardly a marriage. What ever be the semantics, she would have a new life.

She was afraid of her uncles. She could no longer live in the same village. She told her grandpa that she was willing to take care of him, if he followed her. She was a skilled worker and she could easily find a job in cotton industry. He agreed. He wanted to bid good bye to few people in his village. If he were to do it, he could inadvertently give away the plans to his sons. He decided to move to a new location soon after discharge from the hospital. He would begin a new life. His grand daughter would be his care giver.

I had enormous joy in dealing with her and her grand father. They had real life problems. They had no money. They were surrounded by crooked relatives, who could not be trusted. They were on the verge of giving up. The girl had suicidal ideation and man had no idea of what was going on. A timely admission and supportive therapy filled them with hope and helped them decide what was good for them. I learnt that at times, apart from allowing ventilation of distress, all we need to do is to offer a platform for mindful thought on choices and their consequences.

BECOME A FAN OF THE LIBERAL MINUTE:
http://facebook.com/LiberalMinute

A Liberal Minute with Jason Lamarche.

In this episode I speak with Ross Rebagliati who is the world’s first ever gold medalist in snowboarding. Ross talks about his historic Olympic gold medal victory, political vision, and his campaign for federal MP in the Okanagan—Coquihalla riding.

Ross is also the author of a new book called “Off the Chain: An Insider’s History of Snowboarding”. His book is available at Chapters and online via this link: http://bit.ly/6MChaw

For more info on Ross visit his website at:

http://RossRebagliati.com

“All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, O Lord; and shall glorify thy name.”” Psalm 86:9

Today is American Thanksgiving day and believe me, it is not just for them but the entire world. All over the world, people are celebrating in whatever ways they could.

What about you; are you celebrating? Are you giving thanks to God for having this privilege to see year 2010? Are you happy?

Today, I must confess that, to God be all the Glory forever and ever! Use few minutes of your busy time to pause and reflect on how far you have gone in life, where you are right now and where you are aiming for, you will discover that you just have no reason not to worship God today.

Don’t allow this day to pass you by, get on your knelt, or in your heart and give thanks to God. All nations shall surely worship the creator of the entire human race.

Tell me, who else deserves your worship and praise if not God? Please worship Him!

Peace!

Princess Ayelotan
©2009 All Rights Reserved
http://www.princessayelotan.com/

This helpline is closing in England due to lack of funding.  I’ve actually never even heard of a helpline that specifically caters to survivors of forced marriages, but I’m glad that it exists.

Forced marriages or arranged marriages always gets media coverage when something outrageous happens like this.

First of all, I’d like to point out that I do realize that not EVERY arranged marriage is a forced one and that I do understand that dating and marriage in different cultures mean different things.  However, as long as both the people have equal choice in the matter, I have no problem.  BUT, when parents pressure women specifically to marry a certain person in order to maintain some false sense of honour, carry on tradition, keep the culture, etc, I have a MAJOR issue.  Here’s a distinction between forced and arranged marriage in simple language

Women that are forced to marry often have no where to turn because the people that are pressuring them to marry are their own family members, including immediate and extended family.  Phone lines like Jasvinder Sanghera’s are important, especially since the people answering the phone calls are also survivors and can relate to what the callers are going through.  The line gives women support and resources on where to go for help to escape families or forced marriages.

Forced marriage goes a lot further than just trying to tell your kid who to date/be with/marry.  The idea of forcing a marriage satisfies a patriarchal ideal that women’s relationships need to be controlled and monitored.  A forced marriage reinforces the idea that women are like property to be traded for money, actual property, or simply for a higher social status.

Even though I couldn’t imagine having my parents suggest partners for me, everyone has different dating ideals and the Western way isn’t the only way. 

 However, I didn’t always understand that……   I remember when I was in high school and I was talking about how arranged marriages were wrong and harmful to the women involved.  A Muslim friend of mine enlightened me on what an arranged marriage really was and how even though it’s different from my idea of dating, it’s still just as valid.  She explained to me that for her mother, an arranged marriage is presenting and suggesting men she should marry and then her choosing.  If she doesn’t like the man or any of the men, then she would tell her mother so and that would be that.  Her mother would bring another man and so on.  She even went as far to tell me that this arrangement is actually a lot easier than Western style dating because the men are brought to you and YOU choose, as opposed to going out to meet different men and not knowing their intentions.  My friend explained to me that stories like these are not what  arranged marriages are supposed to be, but they are a sick, twisted, abusive version of  it.

Even though I was ignorant to what an arranged marriage was as opposed to a forced marriage, I also blame the mainstream media for using the terms arranged marriage and forced marriage interchangeably.  Using these terms interchangeably makes people confuse the two, so when a person hears arranged marriage, they think of some unfortunate woman who is killed by her family because she didn’t marry who they wanted.  Meanwhile, there are many successful arranged marriages that of course aren’t going to make the news because there’s no story that includes an interesting tidbit for the general reading public.  Using the term, “arranged marriage” when talking about “forced marriage” allows for every situation to be seen as the same.

Women should have choices in who they marry and whether or not they want to continue in those marriages once they have already taken place.  If we don’t allow women to make these choices, then we aren’t trusting women to do what’s best for themselves and their lives.

What’s this emphasis on “honour” within the families?  Since when is exercising free choice by refusing to marry someone considered dishonourable?  What’s with pretending that this horrific behaviour is “culture”?  Somehow, women are made responsible for holding the “honour” or standing of a family in the community.  The behaviour or perceived behaviour of women in a family dictate how a family is perceived, thereby making male members of the family attempt to control those actions.

Hopefully, people will start to understand that there is a difference between arranged and forced marriages.  Hopefully, women continue to get the help they need even though this helpline may close down.  Hopefully, women will not continue to be forced or tricked into situations they don’t want to be in.  Hopefully, women everywhere will be allowed the agency to make important decisions in their own lives.