← Back to Videos
This content has been automatically translated. View original in Arabic
New livestream: The amended law is poisoned
#PoisonedChildLaw #PoisonedAmendedLaw
#PoisonedChildLaw #PoisonedAmendedLaw
Peace be upon you, esteemed guests. Please confirm in the comments if the audio and video are clear. We will wait for one minute before starting to ensure everyone has joined. We kindly ask our esteemed guests to share the broadcast on your main channels to spread the benefit.
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the worlds, and peace and blessings be upon the mercy of Allah to the worlds, our master, beloved, and role model Muhammad, peace be upon him and his family and companions. "O my Lord, expand for me my breast and make easy for me my task and loosen the knot from my tongue that they may understand my speech." O Allah, amen.
I begin with an important introduction to put you in the picture of what is happening behind the scenes in Jordan regarding the "Child Law." As you know, the law has been under the jurisdiction of a specialized committee for amendment based on the comments that appeared during the past period. This committee began discussing the amendments last Monday and did not finish except the first item (the definitional one). When they reached the second item, a dispute occurred, and the session was postponed until the next day.
Based on what we have read from the amendments, we did not find them to reach a satisfactory level that removes the "toxicity" from this law. Therefore, we deemed it necessary to have this live broadcast to share awareness and pressure the decision-makers to reject this law and withdraw it completely, avoiding a situation whose consequences are not commendable.
We would like to inform you that we have launched a new hashtag to be added to the original one, which is: #The_Amended_Law_Is_Poisonous. Our goal is to send a message to everyone working on this law that it is still poisonous and has not changed fundamentally to suit us as Muslims. We kindly ask you to use both hashtags: #Child_Law_Is_Poisonous and #The_Amended_Law_Is_Poisonous to reach the trend and amplify our voice.
Before delving into the details, let us agree on a clear framework: The Child Law was not driven internally but came based on a convention issued by the United Nations, which the state signed. Therefore, the convention became a reference for interpreting the laws derived from it.
We, as a Jordanian people, love children and want to protect them, but our reference is our Sharia and values. This law did not originate from them, so it is not permissible to read it with the eye of the current Jordanian environment only, but we must look at the goals of its source (the original convention) that seeks to obliterate our identity and values. In international legal custom, international conventions "prevail" over local legislation. Therefore, the law will be interpreted according to the definitions of the United Nations, not according to local terms or media justifications.
Sheikh Ibrahim: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. Allah, the Most High, says: "If you disagree on anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is best and most suitable for final interpretation."
The most dangerous term included in the Child Law is "competent authorities" (Article 2/B), and it has not been amended in a real sense but only in form. The danger lies in the fact that it is a vague term that does not specify the reference or standards. Are the covenants of the United Nations and "CEDAW" the reference to which we will be held accountable in the lives of our children?
The proposed definition states that competent authorities are "any public, private, or civil entity concerned with the child." This opens the door for hundreds of associations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to intervene in managing the affairs of our children and families, regardless of their agendas or sources of funding. Any amendment to other articles without a precise definition of these authorities is a formal change of no value. We demand the cancellation of this article altogether; our country was doing well for decades without the need for these "competent authorities" imported to obscure the role of the family and introduce external agendas into our homes.
Dr. Eyad: If we look at Article 10, we find it glowing: "The child has the right to obtain free primary health services." But the question is: What is the definition of "primary health services" according to the entity demanding the law (the United Nations)?
When we refer to the World Health Organization (WHO), we find that "primary health care" includes what is called "sexual and reproductive health." The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), which has a branch in Jordan, promotes under this name "comprehensive sexual education" for children, which includes teaching masturbation, deviance, and providing contraceptives and abortion for minors away from the knowledge of parents.
As for Article 11, it stipulates ensuring that the child enjoys "the highest level of health." This phrase is verbatim from the comments of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (Comment No. 15), which interprets "the highest level of health" as including "sexual and reproductive freedom" and the child's right to control his body. Therefore, we are facing texts that seem innocent but are laden with international definitions that clash with our religion and nature.
A phrase was added in Article Four stating that the rights of the child shall be "without prejudice to public order and religious and social values." Some see this as sufficient, but we emphasize that this addition does not remove the toxicity for the following reasons:
We began discussing Article Four and how the addition of the phrase "religious values" is merely a cosmetic touch that does not change the essence of the poisonous law, and now we continue the analysis of the rest of the articles and the resulting risks:
Dr. Eyad: Article 12 stipulates taking the necessary measures to care for the child "while taking into account the best interest of the child." This phrase is the "password" that nullifies all reassuring amendments.
When referring to the guiding manual for defining "the best interest of the child" (which was funded by international entities such as the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency "Sida"), we find that the best interest is considered a "governing value" that takes precedence over the interests of the family and the state. The manual explicitly states that in case the best interest conflicts with "narrow interpretations of religion," the child's interest must be given priority. This provision is the legal prelude to removing children from their parents under the pretext of protecting them, exactly as "social services" do in Sweden and Scandinavian countries.
Dr. Yusuf: Article Seven discusses the child's right to "express their opinions" according to their "age and level of maturity." Here, we play a game of "cognitive reframing"; where the reference to the Hereafter and parental responsibility is overshadowed by the "appearance of worldly life."
In Western societies, early legal marriage is considered a "crime," while the girl is allowed to practice "sexual freedom" and obtain contraceptives and abortions without her parents' knowledge under the name of "maturity." This law paves the way for teaching our children that they are "free individuals" separated from the honor of the family and the values of the father and mother. The danger lies in "access to content"; where children will have access to pornographic or deviant ideas through targeted electronic arrays, and parents will be prevented from intervening on the grounds of "the child's privacy" and "maturity."
Dr. Abdul Rahman Dhaker: Article Eight discusses "respecting the child's private life." Who decides the boundaries of this privacy? Does the father have the right to prevent his son from accessing an atheist or pornographic website, or will that be considered "abuse" and an infringement on his privacy?
We are facing a discourse of power and weakness; powerful countries like America did not sign this convention because they understand its danger to their sovereignty and values, while we are being led to it under the pressure of "international commitments." In Canada and Britain, there are laws that allow parents to use "reasonable force" to correct a child's behavior, while here we are being given vague laws that make the father and mother merely "service providers" (food and drink) and strip them of their parental authority in favor of "specialized entities."
Article 21 stipulates that educational and health service providers must report to "specialized entities" any cases of violence or abuse. Due to the absence of a precise definition of "verbal violence" or "abuse," preventing a child from engaging in deviant behavior or forcing them to pray may be considered "violence" that warrants reporting.
This will lead to:
Professor Asad Ibrahim: The repeated statement by officials that approving the law is an "international commitment" is an admission of yielding to external pressures. Current international policy is heading towards atheism, moral decay, and distorting innate nature, and submitting to it is a stain. The amendments made are "marginal" and "cosmetic" and do not touch the essence of the law, which is the blatant intervention in family rights.
Final Word: O legislators, fear Allah for us and for our children. You are opening a door to a violent wind that will uproot our values. The miracle tomorrow is in the hands of the people and their awareness. If this law is approved, then the care (food and drink) will be for the parents, and the upbringing (values and ideas) will be for the specialized entities and the United Nations.
"And by the afternoon, indeed, mankind is in loss, except those who have believed and done righteous deeds and advised each other to truth and advised each other to patience."
#Poisoned_Child_Law #Poisoned_Amended_Law
Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.