Wishful thinking on my part:
The Maryland court said: THIS GUY IS A GIANT DOUCHE AND SOME COUNTRY JUSTICE IS IN ORDER.

what IS it with world bank employees.

Ug, the fact that this prick tried to use Islamic divorce as a means to screw his wife is disgusting. Plus, if my Sunday school memory about Islamic divorce proceeding is correct, he did it just plain wrong. Dick.

Oh Allah will surely make him pay...muhahahahahaha!!!

"Beetlejuice! Beetlejuice! BEETLEJUICE!"

....hmmm. Didn't work. Neither should repeating "I divorce thee" three times.

Wow, it's like Bloody Mary, but scarier.

@misssgolightly: That's because it's Beetleguese, Missy ;-)

Seems like a step in the right direction to me.

And I know this is off topic but, how do you make italics?

@treschic: [www.ibdguy.com]
Go to the bottom.

If that site isn't useful just Google "HTML" or "HTML tips."

Too bad she had to wait from 2003 until 2008 to get some money. The court system is no quick justice.

After I got divorced, I went back to the church where we got married and walked up the aisle backwards.

@Archetype: Thanks!

@misssgolightly: Yeah it sort of reminds me of that episode of Full House, when DJ accidentally married the boy visiting from Greece because they walked around the table. If something reminds you of an episode of Full House, that's NOT a good sign.

@NOLAgirl: I stole the wedding flutes, and have them so that I can crush them up and bury them.

@Archetype: Not the movie! [www.imdb.com]

@misssgolightly: Biggie Smalls, Biggie Smalls, Biggie Smalls.
Nope, that one didn't work either!

I know this post pokes some fun at the '3 strikes and you're out' but divorce proceedings in Islam when developed were revolutionary at the time since both a woman or man could initiate the proceedings and that was centuries ago. That's incredible considering Henry VIII lopped a fewe heads off just because divorce wasn't available. Shame.

Presidential nominee, presidential nominee, presidential nominee!

...

....

Sigh.

@marin79: Great, now Butters has to go to a party with Biggie. Good going!

@Sophie: And formed his own church when he grew tired of that.

OG Islam is incredibly radical, and very progressive for the time in which it was developed. It's a shame that so many tribal customs have tainted it over the years.

"I break with thee, I break with thee, I break with thee" then throw dog doodoo on her shoes.

Does this mean for marriages via chanting is not valid? My mom is going to be pretty heart broken that I'm not actually married to that lady I yelled at on the bus last month.

In high school our teacher made us pick lab partners and said the only way we could not have this partner (if they sucked or something) was if you said "I divorce thee" three times. We thought it was freaky.

Y'all can clown on Pakistani law all you want, but in the process you're kinda clowning on the system under which they married in the first place.

The question here was surely far less about that practice and far more about whether he could get all sly and dissolve the marriage on Pakistani soil (hence the embassy), and under the original marriage contract -- a question that's a lot knottier than this makes it look. (Both legally knotty and generally knotty, because it poses weird questions about the notion of "marriage" in one place having to be translated to another one: if you and a husband were living in Pakistan, you probably wouldn't be arguing that any divorce proceedings should be under the law of the country where you reside!)

Apparently he did do it wrong. He is supposed to say Talaq on three DIFFERENT occasions. It cannot be uttered all at one time. It' not considered valid.

In England they are trying to pass Sharia law...I dont think it'll got far...I sooooooo do not see that happening in the US.

As a product of Islamic education (though very much a heathen in that regard) I can say he's doing it wrong.

Talaq is meant to be a "heads-up, something's wrong here". Divorce is meant to be a last resort. The first time the husband says it, the couple's meant to work on reconciliation and seeing how they can make the best of it. If it's still not working, 2nd talaq. Try again. The 3rd time is when you've exhausted all possibilities and are absolutely sure divorce is the best option.

This wouldn't even hold in Syariah court - which you'll have to visit eventually to get the divorce processed (giving the woman her due process).

Women have their own divorce system in Islam too; forgot what it's called though.

I dunno about saying Talaaq on three different occasions - In Midnight's Children, Nadir Khan divorces Mumtaz by writing it down three times before fleeing into the night...

'course, Salman Rushdie has been known to take liberties with Islamic tradition

Ha, the MAIN thing he did wrong was trying to execute his little end-run after she's already started proceedings in the U.S. -- he'd have a much more legitimate claim if he'd beat her to it. (Umm, speed-wise, beat her to it speed-wise.)

LMFAO... =D@Ttteri:

@briardahl: It's very true. Internationally, particularly in majority Muslim countries, multiple marriages are legal, but I don't think the second+ wives would be considered legitimate wives here, right? I mean, it sort of comes down to him being shady and the fact that despite their (his?) citizenship they lived here for almost 20 years and the fact that it was pretty obviously designed to make an end-run around the possibility of having to pay alimony or child support. That's the due process part that the court's all incensed about.

Irfan Aleem, meet Nelson Muntz!

Yay for justice! I plan on commenting on every positive post about women from now on, just on principle...

Just an FYI. You can't pronounce 3 Talaq in one sitting. It takes months. Muslim man = misogynist. This does not bode well for me since I'm a Muslim .

@Sophie: That's a nice side note. So how did we go from that, and women fighting in battle may I add, to the overwhelming misogyny coming from Muslim men.

@boring diatribes:

And Raven almost married an African prince by accepting a feather and then a fancy dress!

@Xavoc: haha! I love a good South Park reference! But at least Butters got to go to the best party ever. I hear there was an acura cake.

@meanmommy: And Bret Michaels almost chose a blow-up doll to be his girlfriend by accepting a contract with VH1. All these crazy tv rituals!

@briardahl: Good points! I wish the article went into more of the technical background on where their citizenship resided. This also speaks to the push to recognize Shira law where it's currently dismissed.

@boring diatribes: i "married" my boyfriend in kindergarten after watching that episode.

in certain native american tribes, i heard a woman can divorce her husband by leaving his shoes outside. that'll teach him to leave them all over the front hallway.

That pink and turquoise outfit is hot.

Wow, did you guys read the article?

His attorney, Priya R. Aryar, said, "We're very disappointed with the decision. We think this could have adverse ramifications for a whole bunch of people who reside in the D.C. area under diplomatic visas and assume that their family law rights and obligations are governed by the laws of their country of citizenship."

There is nothing I hate more than abuse of diplomatic immunity.

I'm not familiar with this practice, but I did see this awesome british movie from the sixties in which a beautiful danish girl with great hair and mod clothes marries some really boring guy named "Sebastian," who's (I think) older than her (or at least not as cool).

But then she can't find him for some reason. So finally, at the end of the movie, she stands on a rock in a park and spins around three times and says "I divorce thee, I divorce thee, I divorce thee."

I've been trying to find that movie again, but have no idea what it was called or who the actors was. At least now a teensy-weensy-eensy bit of the mystery is solved!! Now I know what the hell that melancholy last scene was about.

"None of those women are Farah, by the way. But they are a way to show happy women from another country not looking oppressed. Farah told reporters by phone that she's "ecstatic" at the ruling."

Jezebel is depressing me. Is this supposed to be a way of thumbing your nose at that great post/discussion from yesterday?

@goodcheapfun: See, and this is the kind of thread that these kinds of Jezebel posts beget. It's like the discussion about asking "Why?" yesterday never happened. I don't think you can really make the case that Muslim men are on the whole as individuals more misogynistic than men of any other religion (Texas child-screwing cults, "rape trails" and all that...) or culture. What is different in these different national contexts is the way power is mediated by the state, and who controls the state - and that has a lot to do with the structures of colonization, decolonization. Let's not forget that it was the United States that put the Taliban (for instance) in power in Afghanistan during the Cold War - drastically changing the position of women in that country.

I don't know whether it was AnonLobb or someone else who added the tag:

"None of those women are Farah, by the way. But they are a way to show happy women from another country not looking oppressed. Farah told reporters by phone that she's "ecstatic" at the ruling."

But, um, tokenism anyone?? This is PRECISELY what we were talking about not two days ago re: whether this community (Jezebel) applies the same rigor to BS when white Western women aren't the ones in question.

First of all, the entire "Oh look, we picked a random, happy photo!" rings as SO trivializing to me. THAT's how Jezebel proposes to give a more serious, nuanced hearing to international women's topics? Take a happy picture, and, well, it's no longer "disaster porn" so that's probably sufficient? In fact, it's so preposterous I can't help but wonder if the person writing was being DELIBERATELY sarcastic... in which case, really?? This is a joke to you?

Second: "women from another country"?? Really? How can we tell from that photo that the women are from another country? Because if you wear a sari, you're not really American?

Yes, perhaps picture-chooser actually confirmed that the photo was of women in saris IN a different country (...and again, they still could be American!)...but given what a throw-away line this was at all, the benefit of the doubt is hard to muster.

Finally...I think it's sort of hilarious that the writer follows up the line about showing happy women supposedly from other countries...with a quote about how great the American system was for this woman!

...anyway, if this was a genuine effort, then I applaud the thought, but the effect was insufficient. Jezebel really needs to step it up here.

@historygrrl: It sounds like that, no?? Like, so staggeringly naive that it's basically un-believable--and maybe must be some kind of really offensive sarcasm?

@briardahl: This is a jurisdictional mess.

@GoodMorningAngels: Yes. I'm not sure what to think of it.

@la_phantom_lady: Dammit, I was going to make that joke. Well played.

@GoodMorningAngels: I agree. While this story is interesting to me and I'm glad that it was posted, your points are really spot on.

The guy completely got it wrong. As others have stated, it's not to be said all at once (This is invalid). Divorce is allowed in Islam, but it meant to be a last resort and the husband is meant to support the wife.

FYI Many mosques in the U.K will now no longer marry a couple unless they can show that they have already had a civil wedding, this is down to the Islamic idea of respecting the laws of the country you're living in and to stop any shady behaviour like this man above.

As for polygyny, again more western based scholars are advising against it, because 1, unless everyone involve is nice to the point of saintliness it doesn't work out and 2, In countries were polygyny isn't recognised, the second, third or fourth wives do not have legal status, which means they are not equal to the first wife and under Islamic law all wives must be treated equally.

@rosasparks: Thanks--yeah I thought the story was definitely interesting/worth posting. It was just that last bit that was, um, of concern...

@GoodMorningAngels: I actually skimmed past that in the article (my bad)Thanks for pointing it out.

Anyone a Max Romeo fan?
"One step forward, two steps backward."

Well, it's nice to know that the Md CoA is not misogynistic. Only homophobic.

@J.D.Regent: Maybe it's working for an evil organization that makes them lose their way?

Also, regarding the repetition of "I divorce thee", isn't that also how one can request a divorce acording to the Torah or rabbinical law? I could be mis-remembering, but I seem to recall hearing/learning that at some point. Which is why Jesus in the Gospels saying that you can't get a divorce is actually a break with Jewish tradition.