SomaliNet Forums

Could you do it? For most the answer will be no. But saying no purely based on a person's outer appearance is difficult to justify. On a moral level, how can you justify descriminating against disabled people.

If you, a family member or even your child were physically impaired in some way by no fault of your own, and were rejected in marriage proposals because of that, how would you feel? Would your opinion change? Life is fragile and unpredictable; tomorrow you may have an accident, soccumb to a disease or through some other eventuality become physically impaired. Having thought about it from that perspective I find it really difficult to morally justify saying no.

Who would want someone to marry them just because the person felt morally obligated to?

Besides, desires don't need moral justification.

yungnfresh wrote:Who would want someone to marry them just because the person felt morally obligated to?

Besides, desires don't need moral justification.

A desperate person. A hopeless person. etc.

You've not fully understood me though. Its not about marrying a disabled person because you feel sory for them, but because you take the time and energy to get to know the person beyond face value physical appearances.

I am sorry -- cilmiile-- the answer is NO.


First of all, Bismiilaah----Caalaf waa Caalaf---u marry who Alaah swt ordained u to marry. Second of all-- I think the act of marriage-- which is basically the act of rigorous humping in the bedroom is NOT compatible with disability. A disabled person would suffer if a none disable person is expected to hump vigorously until volumous orgasm. (or vice versa if the disabled person is a male--he is expected to be really active in this primal act)

You see---darling---its a question of physical fitness. Nothing wrong with remaining celibate if u r disabled. Amazon dot come has cheap sex toys.

I'm 99% sure I wouldn't, but who knows.

Moral obligations? You are aware we live in a cruel world, right?

If they're disabled, their chances are slimmer than others, that's the plain truth. Not everyone is lucky. If my child has the same problem, i wouldn't want someone to accompany them out of moral obligation. Ma dadkaa isku miskiiminee? Like Basra said, calafku waa calaf.

Physical Impairment includes but does not exclusively refer to debilitating disability. It could be something as simple as cross eyed or some like that, only example I could think of.

Lillaahiya wrote:I'm 99% sure I wouldn't, but who knows.

And how would you justify that to yourself if you were in some way physically impaired.

CilmiDoone wrote:

yungnfresh wrote:Who would want someone to marry them just because the person felt morally obligated to?

Besides, desires don't need moral justification.

A desperate person. A hopeless person. etc.

You've not fully understood me though. Its not about marrying a disabled person because you feel sory for them, but because you take the time and energy to get to know the person beyond face value physical appearances.

Ok then, who would wanna be with a desperate/hopeless person?

I understand what ur tryna say but there's a difference between not discriminating on them based on job opportunities and not discriminating on them based on marriage...moral obligation wouldn't have anything to do with your decision to be with them otherwise it's doomed right there.

Folks what happened to basic reading comprehension. I did not say there is or ought to be a moral obligation on non-disabled people. I simple question how the discrimination against physically impaired people, without any other assessment on intellect, character, personality etc., could morally be justified. I did not state that there is some sort of definitive moral obligation to marry physically impaired people, I simply questioned whether there is a moral consideration to be made, not to discriminate on physical appearances alone, without even getting to know the person first.

Yung, you dont always end up with what you want. You can never really be sure of what the other person is thinking. Whether someone is desperate or not is something that only they themselves can truly quantify... we can only assume.

Tough question. The 'right' answer is that "No, you shouldn't discriminate against the physically impaired and give them a fair chance for guur". But we don't live by 'right' answers. When it comes to guur, survival of the fittest/hottest takes precedence over moral considerations mainly due to one reason: reproducing healthy offspring.

Mida kale, I think it's a matter of degrees. Physically impaired could mean:

-slight dhutin, after-effects of mild childhood polio

-crutches

-wheelchair-bound for rest of life

-blind

-deaf

-deformity

I think most people would be ok with slight barely noticeable physical impairments/deformities, but they probably would balk at something very visible or genetic(which could be passed on to the next generation).

CilmiDoone wrote:

Lillaahiya wrote:I'm 99% sure I wouldn't, but who knows.

And how would you justify that to yourself if you were in some way physically impaired.

I think someone with a disability, depending on the severity, would come to terms with the fact that their condition could/would be a financial/emotional/physical burden for whomever they marry.

I could go as far as deaf,maybe.

^ Ta daayo, ka waran kan mute la dhaho