you rang me at the end of the world 
and asked if I was going into war 
with the three o’clock connecting train
at Limerick Junction I threw a few punches 
down the phone and took shots 
of a mountain I didn’t know the name of
things like and how is she, my replacement? 
it was a shitty thing to say 
but I wanted to say it
make you feel bad for liking brunettes 
you pretended to take offence 
but that kind of thing is the reason you still ring me
are you ok?
there is a tenderness still there 
a care that hasn’t been harmed 
in our surrendering of arms
yours are for holding 
someone else 
and mine
well mine have gained some resolute sense 
now I just hold a pen and let the other hand itch 
for a cigarette that I won’t give it
there was a threat today 
six times the size of Chernobyl
the grass glowing yellow 
the sky an infinite blue
the mountains 
have lain down to die 
in a brown and purple hue
and every time
the world ends 
you ring me 
to provoke me 
into reminding you 
of what it was all for
and why
we can’t describe love 
without the language 
of war.
&nbsp;
<pre>Photo Credit: <a style="color: #999999;" href="https://unsplash.com/@ekarchmit?utm_source=unsplash&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_content=creditCopyText">Ernest Karchmit</a> on Unsplash</pre>

purple mountain_ernest-karchmit-33FlT2A83H4-unsplash

Poem: Shots at close range

The desire to find the ‘all-round’ partner has made marriage among British Muslim Iraqis unrealistic  
&nbsp; 
“There is a marriage crisis in the Iraqi community. Both guys and girls need to make more of an effort with themselves.” 
I couldn’t agree more with what this friend said. However, what they meant and what I meant were not the same thing at all. Today, we are faced with more young, single, British Muslim Iraqis floating free while waiting for their perfect match to fall into their laps than we know what to do with. There has been an insidious change in our thinking and our values. We want to be 100 per cent certain without a shadow of a doubt that this is the best person for the best version of ourselves. So we wait. And wait. And wait. 
There is a marriage crisis in our community because we are waiting. Waiting to finish degrees, to move up in our careers, waiting for a house, to travel more, do more, live more, all before we tie the knot. Marriage seems to be the end point, something we all want but later, after, anywhere but here and now. We chase material things first because of a misplaced sense of individual development that we fool ourselves into thinking is necessary for marriage. We want to be the best we can be for our partner and we look for the partner that can do it for us. The worst of all is waiting until we’re ready, as if we will be wake up one day having acquired all the right qualities we need to make the most important decision of our life, and with this infinite wisdom we decide that we want someone who has it all and no less. 
There is a marriage crisis in our community because we want it all. Guys want girls who are young, beautiful (and not the subjective we-are-all-beautiful-in-our-own-way kind, but the objective if-I-asked-a hundred-random-people-they-would-all-say-you’re-beautiful kind), dress well, have degrees, can work for a living (but will give it all up to raise their kids), raise kids, cook like their mum, run a household, be the spiritual beacon of the marriage, share the same interests and do charity. Did I leave anything out? Probably. 
On the other side, girls are no better. They want tall, older but not too old, masculine but sensitive, funny but mature, clever but not geeky, kind but firm. Someone who gives them attention but not too much that they become clingy, who is brave enough to make the first move but not so bold that they’re sleazy, who dresses well but not like they’re trying to, who has a degree that girls can show off, money to spend on their weddings and rich parents to buy them a house. A man who likes art and poetry but who can change a light bulb and start a fire. The end result? Hopeless singles. 
There is a marriage crisis in our community because we don’t know what to believe anymore. We’ve lost faith in marriage, in our community and, worst of all, we’ve lost faith in our faith. The irony for us Iraqi Muslims is that Islam provides us with the guidance and spiritual motivation for partner selection and happy marriages, yet the last thing many of us turn to now is that religion. Qur’anic verses about marriage are stamped onto our wedding invites but not paid heed to. I can’t help but call out to you all to turn to our book, our prophet, his companions and his family and to take comfort in our Islamic ideology. 
For centuries our religion has protested the importance of family values, of modesty, generosity, humbleness, and faithfulness.  To be content with God’s will. To strive for the afterlife and spend this life serving God. To choose a partner acceptable in faith and morals who can hold your hand and guide you through the twists and turns of life and fight away the taunts and temptations of a material world. A partner who will love you for who you are and all you are, accepting your strengths as blessings from God and embracing your weaknesses as tests of their faith. A partner who believes that if something is broken you fix it, not throw it away. A partner who can help you raise a better generation of Muslims than our own and one who, above all, can walk with you towards the gates of paradise. 
There is a marriage crisis in our community but we can fix it, because we have one common tie that binds us all; our faith. It all comes back to that. One day we will realise that it doesn’t matter how we look, what we studied or where we live. One day we will take off our perfection-tainted glasses, we will lift the veils on our hearts and we will clear the clouds of doubt from our minds.  One day we will look for and we will see each other’s souls, we will appreciate the essence of who we are and we will fall head over heels in love with that.
<div>
<div>
<pre>Image from: http://sarahcarlin.com/wedding-singer/</pre>
</div>
</div>

On Unrealistic Love: Marriage Among British Muslim Iraqis

How Valentine&#8217;s Day highlights all that is wrong with our attitude towards relationships 
&nbsp; 
February 14th isn&#8217;t for everyone. As the date approaches, anti-romance can increasingly be found orbiting cyberspace as more and more of us fall out of love with Valentine&#8217;s Day. For some, it&#8217;s a good excuse to eat somewhere nice and drink a lot of wine. For others, all the heartfelt gestures are a bit too much to stomach. 
We&#8217;re a dysfunctional, peculiar lot: if Valentine&#8217;s messages told the truth, many would never get written. An anonymous card might mean you have a secret admirer, but it could also mean anything from “I&#8217;m incapable of verbalising how I feel, so I got this card to say it for me” to “you don&#8217;t know me, but I stare at you when you&#8217;re not looking and draw weird pictures of what our future children will look like.” 
Often “I love you” doesn&#8217;t quite pin down what you need to say, but apparently it&#8217;s not quite as romantic to write, “we&#8217;ve only been dating for a month and I don&#8217;t actually feel that way yet, but I think we have potential.” Relationships go through a lot of weird stages, yet the tradition tries to suggest that we&#8217;re all in a uniform state of hopeless infatuation. Funnily enough, cards that say “divorce is stressful and expensive, so Happy Valentine&#8217;s Day” or &#8216;thanks for keeping me company while I wait for someone better” aren&#8217;t readily available. 
It&#8217;s often said the British aren&#8217;t great with their feelings, but sometimes that could be a good thing: no one wants to open a card that says, “I&#8217;ve been hiding in a bush outside your window for a week and I think I&#8217;m ready to take the relationship to the next level.” Luckily, these days people can just use social media to side-step their limited ability for self-expression. Surely there should be a more inclusive celebration for the cynical and emotionally-detached among us. Why is there no national day for chain-eating junk food and watching DVDs? Valentine&#8217;s is great if hearts and flowers are your thing, but there&#8217;s no point pretending you&#8217;re a lovesick teenager when really you mean “we&#8217;ve grown old and disgusting, but we still have each other.&#8217; 
How do we deal with this annual predicament? Is it better to just lie than say “I only love you when I&#8217;m drunk?” Is telling someone you&#8217;re “quite fond” of them okay? Many of us just see the date as an opportunity for consumer marketing to cash in on a yearly obligation to confess feelings that we either don&#8217;t have, or aren&#8217;t comfortable admitting to.  So for how long will the remaining traditionalists continue to spend money on celebrating the event if they&#8217;re only doing it to avoid hurt feelings?
<pre>Image from: <a href="http://25.media.tumblr.com/5557fd3c35aa306f708c23fc96f6b776/tumblr_mogaocL9K71ssg2b9o1_1280.jpg">http://25.media.tumblr.com/5557fd3c35aa306f708c23fc96f6b776/tumblr_mogaocL9K71ssg2b9o1_1280.jpg</a></pre>

When &quot;I Love You&quot; Doesn&#039;t Quite Work

After a long line of problematic princess fairy tales, Disney&#8217;s Frozen offers a refreshing alternative 
&nbsp; 
In the past Disney’s princess fairy tales were magical dreamlands for our young imaginations to lose themselves in. Enchanting castles with lofty turrets, beautiful princesses in dazzling ballgowns, handsome princes on gallant steeds and happily-ever-afters shaped our wildest dreams. 
Yet these tales frequently offered up a narrative that was damaging to our young impressionable minds. Stories consistently told of weak damsels in distress being saved by strong manly princes, and young girls desperately in love and willing to change beyond recognition for the man of their dreams (who made comparatively little compromise). Most importantly, the stories consistently told of romantic love and of a kind barely resembling reality. 
To realise the damaging effects of these plots takes less imagination than conjuring them up. Little girls should not be raised to think that their ultimate wish is to look beautiful and win over a man be it at the cost of who they are and those they love, as The Little Mermaid’s (1989) Ariel does. Nor should they be raised to think they are inadequate or helpless and in need of a man to survive as Princess Aurora, of Sleeping Beauty (1959), and almost every Disney Princess does. 
Similarly, little boys should not grow up learning that beauty is the prime quality to seek in a partner as Prince Charming (who, apparently, has no name other than this mark of ultimate male desirability) does on seeing Cinderella, nor that women are weak and needy of them. Yet this has frequently been the narrative relayed by the big budget feature films that have been produced and marketed for children by Disney since its first and perhaps most problematic production, Snow White (1937). 
That these cartoons have traditionally focused on romantic love itself is no less troubling. Love is a beautiful and important experience children must be raised to understand. It is also complex and diverse; it is not limited only to romance. In fact, romantic love is perhaps the last kind that the young are in need of exposure to. Familial love, the love of friendship, affection for one’s fellow human being, love for animals, love for the earth, there are countless forms of love that children are far more deserving and in need of learning before introduction to the realm – no less beautiful – of romance. For some reason this fact has eluded Hollywood for much of my lifetime at least. 
However, it seems we are finally witnessing a change. 
Frozen, the tale of two princess sisters, one with the difficult skill of freezing all she touches, is a visually stunning masterpiece with music to match. Indeed it is likely Disney’s most impressive animated production to date, accompanied with musical scores to rival much that precedes it (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moSFlvxnbgk">watch this sequence</a> of Elsa’s song “Let it Go” by the talented Idina Menzel if you don’t believe me). But what was most remarkable of this production was its tale of love; not romantic, nor dependent on a strong male hero, but that between the two sisters, Elsa and Anna. 
Elsa, born with the ability to freeze, is portrayed as a loving and affectionate older sister, mature and responsible, one who deeply cares for Anna and is keen to protect her even at the cost of herself. Anna, is a sprightly younger sibling, idolising of her older sister and desperate to be near her. As younger siblings often are, she is also a little innocent and impulsive, a streak Elsa seeks to guide in order to protect Anna. Meanwhile, Elsa is no less dependent on Anna, whose pure heart and complete loving devotion and faith in her sister crucially guides the troubled older sibling towards reconciliation with her trials and who she is. 
The film begins on the sisters’ deep bond and develops, exploring how that bond is tested. Romantic male love interests feature often, but pale before the central love of sisterhood. This love is a bond which stands the trials of pain, loss, betrayal, rejection and estrangement. It is a love that weathers the coldest of storms. It is also a love which produces one of Disney’s most adorable sidekicks yet; Olaf, the perennially positive little snowman who loves warm hugs. And it is a love that culminates in an inspirational resolution and makes one feel that we finally have a Disney film we would wish for our children to watch and learn from. 
Frozen joins a refreshing turn in animated feature films which increasingly delve into the realms of the loves less heard. From the bond between mother and daughter in Brave (2012) to the importantly meaningful romance in Up (2009), finally we have films that not only entertain, but also inspire. 
Breathtaking animation, masterful music and, most importantly, a heart-warming and inspirational plot of true love; Disney’s Frozen is a must see for all the family.
<pre>Image from: <a href="http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Frozen/Gallery">http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Frozen/Gallery</a></pre>

Lessons in Love from Disney&#039;s Frozen

Playwright Arinze Kene tackles the themes of race, identity, love and hate in his latest play, God’s Property, directed by Michael Buffong 
&nbsp; 
Set in Deptford in 1982, God’s Property tells the story of two mixed race brothers, Chima (Kingsley Ben-Adir) and Onochie (Ash Hunter), who have been estranged for years. 
Elder brother Chima has served the last decade in prison for the murder of a young white girl, leaving 16-year-old Onochie to deal with the stigma of having an older brother accused of murder. Eager to be accepted by his hostile white community, Onochie is quick to deny any relation to his convict brother or his Nigerian heritage, surrounding himself with skinhead friends and his white girlfriend, Holly (Ria Zmitrowicz). A frosty reunion takes place when Chima is suddenly released and tensions quickly heighten when the community discovers he is walking freely amongst them. Onochie is forced to decide whether to stand by the brother he has not seen for 10 years and barely knows, or the community he so desperately wants to be a part of. 
An enjoyable offering from Arinze Kene, the storyline is original and confronts the serious issues of race and self-identity in a compelling and, at times, humorous manner. I could relate to Onochie’s struggle for acceptance by the predominantly white community he is surrounded by, his desire to feel belonging within their culture &#8211; to dress, speak, think, act and even eat as they do. The production delivers a poignant snapshot of attitudes towards race and cultural identity in 1980s UK. The need to reconcile one’s heritage with the prevalent culture is an issue that many minorities still struggle with and can therefore relate to &#8211; the play serves as a vehicle to commence dialogue about these matters in the present day. 
All the cast give memorable performances; Ben-Adir and Hunter are outstanding as Chima and Onochie. The brotherly dynamics between the two are believable. Ben-Adir’s portrayal of an acutely conscious, yet laid-back older brother gives contrast to Hunter’s characterisation of a hot-headed and intelligent, yet naïve younger brother. The casting of Zmitrowicz as Holly is spot-on. Paired with Hunter, the couple offer convincing interaction and provide many light comedic moments, particularly the scene when Onochie tries to take their relationship to “the second level”. 
God’s Property is a co-production between Talawa Theatre Company, Soho Theatre and Albany Theatre, and runs roughly 90 fly-by minutes with no intermission, the action and pace of the story not requiring one. It is currently playing at the Soho Theatre Upstairs, a small venue which seats 90. I enjoyed watching the play in such an intimate setting and felt like a fly on the wall, almost intruding in the lives of these characters. Decorated with tacky floral wallpaper, the kitchen is where all the drama unfolds in the play.  Ellen Cairns’ set design of a 1980s council estate kitchen brings the production to life. 
With a unique story and superb acting, God’s Property is a worthwhile and charming play that confronts many relevant social issues in a brilliant head-on fashion. For an enjoyable, thought-provoking evening, I highly recommend God’s Property. 
God’s Property is showing at London’s Soho Theatre until 23 March, with a BSL performance on the 23rd. At the MAC Birmingham, performances run from 26 to 28 March, with a BSL performance on the 27th.
<pre>Photo Credits: Helen Maybanks / http://www.helenmaybanks.com/blog/</pre>

Love and Acceptance in ‘God’s Property’

As the rose-tinted spectacles fade and the heart shaped balloons slowly shrivel, a fresh look at the concept of love, through the prism of Islam 
&nbsp; 
As we creep into March, I breathe a sigh of relief as that particular time of year has passed, when shops, greeting card companies and casanovas take on the anti-commercial, the cynical and the overly practical. And Muslims. Yep, I’m talking about Valentine’s Day. Over the past few years the long-standing commercialism of Valentine’s Day has risen to monstrous proportions. And the opposition to it has been just as fierce. It has almost become a litmus test of one’s political, social or religious stance. Are you are a celebrator, an abstainer or a protestor? The Muslim world gets particularly hot under the collar over this holiday and so, in true Muslim style, talks and articles flourish in this season ranging from the debate over the permissibility of celebrating it, marriage and Divine Love. This year has been no exception, and whilst I’ve been thoroughly impressed by the quality of discussion that has occurred over the issue, from Muslim and other circles, something has still been niggling at me. Often in discussions about “love in Islam,” the concept is flung so high that it only addresses divine love, or dealt with so clinically that it only deals with the good, the bad and the ugly of marriage. It’s hard to find a nuanced view, when really, it is very simple. 
This world is transitory. Muslims know and believe this, and so they try to live as travellers; detached and not distracted by worldly things. This is one of the most beautiful and liberating aspects of Islam. Muslims also aim to achieve divine love, and to love the Prophet (pbuh) more than their own selves. Love in these cases, therefore, is not base or worldly but is something higher. Marriage, however, is half of the religion. As Muslims we know this, but I sometimes feel this isn’t believed or practiced because of the previous principles. Often it is asked how an institution between man and woman can be so important to faith and belief, when such an attachment seems so worldly. This is the exact dichotomy that I see cropping up in the Valentine’s debate: that love is either correct or corrupt, even when it is lawful. And I find this worrying because we all love, in whatever manifestation it may be. Yet if we are only told that love between humans should be held at arms-length, or that divine love is the only way to go, then I fear for the tenderness, the balance and the spiritual progression of the Muslim community. So what is this over-powering, beautiful and sometimes painful emotion we all feel? And what does Islam say about it, especially when it is between people and especially when it is considered lawful? 
The concept of love in Islam is actually very simple. Abū Hurayra reported “I heard Allah’s Messenger (pbuh) say, ‘Allah created mercy in one hundred parts and He retained with Him ninety-nine parts, and He has sent down upon the earth one part, and it is because of this one part that there is mutual love among the creation so much so that the animal lifts up its hoof from its young one, fearing that it might harm it’.” Love is mercy and mercy (raḥma) is divine.  This is why marriage is considered half of one’s religion. This is why faith is only attained when one loves for one’s brother what one loves for oneself. This is why paradise lies under the feet of one’s mother. These are all manifestations of love, they are all between humans but they all point towards God. Which is exactly where Muslims want to direct themselves. 
Muslims have a very strong concept of how tests and gifts can be utilised to further our spiritual progression, and love in Islam is certainly another means. When giving advice on marriage I often try to remind myself and others of this fact: that the love nurtured between husband and wife is such a concentrated form of love, mercy and patience but also such a test that it is completely understandable why it is considered as half of the religion. In Islam one is also allowed to be romantic and, in my opinion at least, this romance is liberated from the trappings of materialism and consumerism and is exalted by its connotations. Multitudes of sayings of the Prophet (pbuh), often reported by his wives, tell of his affection, intimacy and loving gestures. This is one that particularly gets me a little weepy and has done the rounds this Valentine’s season. “Once the Prophet (pbuh) was sitting in a room with Aisha and fixing his shoes. It was very warm, and Aisha looked to his blessed forehead and noticed that there were beads of sweat on it. She became overwhelmed by the majesty of that sight and was staring at him long enough for him to notice. He said, &#8220;What&#8217;s the matter?&#8221; She replied, &#8220;If Abu Bukair Al-Huthali, the poet, saw you, he would know that his poem was written for you.&#8221; The Prophet (pbuh) asked, &#8220;What did he say?&#8221; She replied, &#8220;Abu Bukair said that if you looked to the majesty of the moon, it twinkles and lights up the world for everybody to see.&#8221; So the Prophet (pbuh) got up, walked to Aisha, kissed her between the eyes, and said, &#8220;Wallahi ya Aisha, you are like that to me and more.&#8221; 
Love, like any emotion, can be consuming. And this is where the flip-side of it comes in. As mentioned before, the blessing/test dichotomy is one that is well known in Islam, so while love is a gift and a blessing it, like anything, needs balance. Love in Islam, therefore is a beautiful means to a beautiful end. A means that encourages the individual to be happy in loving people, to strive to love people, to be reminded of its divine nature and to let loving people be a means to draw closer to God. But to not let love be your god, to be free from the banality of solely material love and be balanced. That, to me at least, is love in Islam.
<pre>Image taken from: http://mentalhealth4muslims.com/2012/02/29/when-love-is-not-enough-reassessing-marriage-in-the-muslim-community/#&amp;panel1-4</pre>

Love in Islam

The tragic events around us remind us of the enduring lessons of love and courage that we can learn from  
&nbsp; 
A week ago, in my last women’s studies seminar of the semester, we were asked to each suggest one thing we would want to leave behind to our daughters. In the moment, I could think of no better gift than courage: the ability to face the impossible and the unthinkable with dignity. 
The killing of 20 children and young adults in an elementary school in Connecticut seemed impossible and unthinkable. Words cannot contain all the affects these events have on us. But we search for words like we search for a reason and for an end to such violence, nonetheless. This search is necessary. Such tragedies lay bare some of the countless failings we are all responsible for perpetuating. 
And yet, somehow, there always is a remainder in our search to bring meaning and control to such horrors, something left over that escapes our understanding. We cannot yet police all possibilities, much less all impossibilities. How can we think ahead and plan for the unthinkable? That is why amidst all the yelling and vengeance, all the bandages and reforms, we must also recognise the unintergratable fragments: the absent and the unknown. 
We have lost. We have failed. Many things will come from this, but not all the potentials that have been foreclosed, not all the things that might have come to be because these children (and they were all someone’s children) have been killed. Nothing, no lesson, no happy accident will bring back what has departed. Many things can be replaced with something else, but not absence. Absence lingers among us, however silent or invisible, like an angel or a ghost of things we may not even remember. Not all failures “get better” or turn into successes, if we go on at all it is by living with them, all the absent potentials and present impossibilities. 
We can live with absence, but how do we live with the unknown? With fear? How do we move on when the unthinkable can and does happen every day? We need courage. Courage is more than simply what we perform in dangerous circumstances, when the chances are against us. Courage can be how we face a circumstance that does not offer us any possible good outcomes. Courage is how we change the game when the rules in play have told us we have already lost. Courage dignifies us by denying that the meaning of lives and actions can be reduced to outcomes. 
It was the day of the Connecticut shooting, as I was getting off the train from DC to Chicago and had been disconnected from all the news of the day that an exchange from the film, “A Lion in Winter”, played through my head. It is when the sons of the king are getting ready to be put to death and one says to the other, “you fool, as if it matters how a man falls down,” to which to other replies “when the falling is all that is left, it matters a great deal.” I tweeted that and when I got home and read the tragic events of the day those words took on a whole new force for me. 
We go ahead because we have to, time keeps passing and things keeping moving, transforming. There is no way to prevent the impossible from happening again, but we can practice the courage to face it however it comes. It allows us to do things, because they must be done, even if we fail, even if we lose, even if we die before we know what came of them. We do what must be done because impossibilities defeat other impossibilities all the time and they can happen through us. 
As stories begin to come to light of the last moments of these kindergarteners, first graders, and school teachers not long out of college, we hear more about how people faced impossible circumstances with dignity. We hear the story of Victoria, a first grade teacher that hid her students in closets and cabinets when she heard the gunshots, then went to the door. When the shooter arrived, she told him that the students were in the gym. He shot her and moved on. 
Because of what she did, she died. Because of what she did, her students lived. We cannot imagine that such a shooting would ever happen to us, nor can we fully imagine what our reaction would turn out being at that moment. But when the impossibility of a gunman aiming to kill these children arrived, it was met by the impossibility of a young woman to face him so that others might live. They did live, and she didn’t, but even if they hadn’t, or she had, what she gave was her dignity in the face of an act of terror. This doesn’t resolve the absence or nullify the fear of the unknown, but shows us how we might face them. 
In the weeks that follow, we will be reminded about gun control laws, the inglorious glorification of murders and violence in the media, mental health, the different faces of terror and terrorism, as well as the uncountable other tragedies that occur every day in other places in the world. These conversations need to happen, because they are one way we do what must be done in the face of events that stare us down and say a violence-free-world is impossible. Sometimes the best way to thwart those statements of finality is to just carry on, somehow. 
I am not so cynical so as to discount one of the perhaps overprescribed and misunderstood methods of carrying on: love. As David Bowie and Queen once took the time to remind us: “These are the days it never rains but it pours…it’s the terror of knowing what the world is about; hearing some good friends screaming, ‘let me out’….Keep coming up with ‘love’ but it’s so slashed and torn&#8230;Can’t we give love that one more chance?” I don’t think it is now any less tacky to say that than when they did, but I don’t think that it is any less needed either. But what do I mean when I say this? Perhaps, nothing more than another “tired and broken hallelujah.” 
Then again…Living amidst poverty, violence, and hate acts on us perpetually, but there is untold, forgotten, absent, unthinkable and impossible goods that happen every day amidst all that because of people having the courage and dignity to take every opportunity to give the world one more gift of love. This is not a love that desires anything but to give itself and let the receiver do with the gift what it will. It is by this kind of love that things have come into being that would have otherwise been foreclosed. It is this gift of love that gives the world not what is just, but provides it with better than it deserves and more than it can handle. 
One of the gifts of this tragedy is change, another may be courage, and certainly one is absence. All may be more than we can handle and certainly more than we deserve, but we carry them with and within us regardless. It is our daughters (and sons) that in this case have left us something behind. These angels have left their message and departed, so that we may carry it on a little longer. Take it, feel it in your hands, and pass it on. As it carries on, it may carry us with it.
<pre>Image from: http://www.heraldsun.com.au</pre>

Carrying On When the Impossible Happens

With an increase in interfaith marriages across Britain, support from faith and community leaders is needed more than ever before 
&nbsp; 
&#8220;I am basically very angry. I don&#8217;t want to have people telling me that God will prove which is right. God doesn&#8217;t care.&#8221; So says an 18-year-old young man whose parents are divorcing. His mother is converting to Islam and believes that she can no longer remain married to his father, who remains a devout Christian. 
This is one of the complex situations facing people of faith today. Rising numbers of interfaith marriages in the UK mean that, for growing numbers, other faiths are no longer remote or &#8220;alien&#8221;, but include members of their own family. I remember speaking to a lady leaving a Catholic church last year: she regretted she couldn&#8217;t stay at an event we were holding there because she had to get back to look after her Muslim grandchild. That scenario, where we have more than one faith (or none) present in a family, is now part of our modern tapestry. One of my own colleagues at the <a href="http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.christianmuslimforum.org&amp;sa=D&amp;sntz=1&amp;usg=AFQjCNGKnBmFCRHVCzhfjAw1ZFKv4SKLkw">Christian Muslim Forum</a>, the UK&#8217;s largest Christian-Muslim interfaith organisation, is a United Reform church minister who also has a Muslim grandson. 
The 2001 census (which for the first time added a question about religion) tells us that there were more than 21,000 interfaith marriages in England and Wales and 837 in Scotland. 
Sadly, despite this increasing diversity and acceptance of difference, interfaith relationships remain problematic for some families and faith communities. The difficulties and uncertainties felt by religious communities when their members form loving relationships across religious and cultural differences can weigh heavily on couples and families. Muslim women in particular can face opprobrium if they wish to marry a non-Muslim man: while Muslim men may &#8220;theologically&#8221; marry a Christian or Jewish woman, the same is not true for a Muslim woman. 
The couple must choose whether the man converts – leading some to accuse such conversions being in &#8220;name&#8221; only – or choose a secular service. How should children of such faiths be raised? What happens if the couple divorces? The resulting schisms within families can be extremely painful. One of our coordinators is a Relate counsellor, and herself in an interfaith marriage, who runs a self-help network dealing with hundreds of couples in interfaith relationships seeking reassurance and support. 
How should faith communities respond to the ethical challenge of ensuring that religion supports unexpected and messily complex family relationships? How best to &#8220;do no harm&#8221; to couples, families and children in these situations? This is a difficult but important area for interfaith dialogue, co-operation and conflict resolution. It is also a place where the Christian Muslim Forum likes to be. 
And so on 26 November, during National Interfaith Week, we are launching Ethical Guidelines for Interfaith Marriages at Westminster Abbey. The aim is that these will be a helpful resource in enabling religious leaders to support mixed-faith couples. In preparing these guidelines, we have worked in partnership with the <a href="http://www.interfaithmarriage.org.uk/">Interfaith Marriage Network (IFMN)</a> and <a href="http://www.mcmarriage.org.uk/">Muslim-Christian Marriage Support Group</a>, which have worked with hundreds of couples over the past 15 years. This year alone, IFMN has received more than 100 requests for support from interfaith couples. Yet so far these relationships have received little attention from either Christian and Muslim scholars or faith leaders. Couples in interfaith relationships often don&#8217;t know where to turn. Meanwhile, imams and ministers are often not trained to respond to the increasing numbers of people turning to them for help in such situations. 
One of the biggest challenges faced by these couples is when they choose to have a religious wedding ceremony (or two ceremonies). In Britain, interfaith marriages are legal: civil (registry office) marriages can be performed without religious conditions, an example of secular provision supporting religious choice. However, interfaith couples often wish to have a religious wedding ceremony, or ceremonies, to validate their marriage. This can be a point of crisis and in some cases disrupts both relationships and families. Sometimes a religious marriage ceremony is only possible if one partner agrees to convert, or accepts terms and conditions, such as in which faith future children will be raised. Of course, unless the other partner is willing to convert then even being asked is a potential source of tension. These tensions do not necessarily go away when nominal conversions are made as they can result in resentment and unwelcome expectations. 
So in our guidelines we are urging non-compulsion, proper consideration of the needs and background of both partners in an interfaith relationship, and whole-hearted encouragement and pastoral support from clergy. Couples in interfaith relationships do not need their journey through life made any more difficult and religion doesn&#8217;t need to make relationships difficult, either.
<pre>Image from: http://muslimvoices.org/interfaith-marriages-spark-discussion</pre>

In the Mix: Making Interfaith Marriages Work

Showing that life in high society is just a performance, director Joe Wright takes each character and makes them the lead in their own play
  
“I think&#8230; if it is true that there are as many minds as there are heads, then there are as many kinds of love as there are hearts.” 
&#8211; Anna Karenina
Recently made into a film by director Joe Wright (Pride and Prejudice, Atonement) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Karenina">Anna Karenina</a> is based on Leo Tolstoy’s epic novel, one of the greatest literary masterpieces. It follows the story of a powerful love affair between Anna and the wealthy Count Vronsky, and the events that unfold within Russian aristocratic society tell a tale of love, lust, virtue, vice and tragedy, and teaches the important lesson that love can never really conquer all. 
For me, being a die-hard Tolstoy fan, this adaptation was long overdue and you can imagine my jump for joy when I heard the film was being released. For the past few years, our helpings of big-screen period dramas have been fairytales of charming princes, fantasy weddings and the inevitable happy endings. There is, however, a dark side of love which is so often neglected. Anna Karenina makes a refreshing change with its portrayal of the tragedy behind a love with no boundaries. 
Played by Keira Knightley, Anna is beautiful. Beautiful without trying and beautiful without knowing, she is a woman who makes whoever she is talking to feel like they are the only person in the world. Usually, I’m not her biggest fan. Pouting, squinting and, generally, over-acting, I wasn’t keen on her being selected to play the main role. Fortunately, Knightley surpassed my expectations. Her portrayal of Anna as somewhat naïve of her beauty, influence and good fortune was spot-on. Her transformation from the admired, ravishing socialite to the broken, banished woman fighting for her love was almost seamless and, most importantly, believable. Moments passed where I forgot that she was acting and genuinely felt sorry for the unfortunate state she had found herself in. 
Playing the object of Anna’s affection, Aaron Taylor-Johnson features here as the leading male, Count Vronsky. Previously known for being the DIY superhero in the film Kick Ass (I was shocked too), Aaron takes on a rather different role here as a charming, wealthy cavalry officer. And he does it pretty well. Again, he displays a seamless transition from a cool, confident charming young aristocrat to a desperate man, hopelessly trying to control a life and a love from spiralling out of control. He portrayed a very convincing product of the isolated, utopian society of which his character was part; you want to love him the way Anna does but find yourself hating him for living his life as normal while Anna is cast out of society for taking on a lover. 
Anna’s husband Karenin, played by Jude Law (Alfie, Sherlock Holmes), had a slightly different feel to how he was in the book. He gave an almost vulnerable, tender impression as he tried to maintain the illusion of integrity throughout Anna’s affair. Despite displaying the most minimal degree of emotion, to the point where he had difficultly interacting with his son, you could almost feel his heart break as he realises his only choice was to lose his wife. Perhaps the most heart-breaking aspect to Karenin’s character was the fact that he was one of the few who stuck by his principles, his faith and his beliefs, but still came up short. 
But, what is most striking and different about this film is its theatrical setting. It’s not quite set as play or as a fantasy but it takes the idea that life in high society is a performance and nothing else. What I loved even more was that Wright took this concept and ran with it; he made each character the lead in their own play, portraying the notion that life ultimately comes down to a matter of perception. Leo Tolstoy doesn’t so much write a story containing characters as write the thoughts of a character in the backdrop of a story. The physical embodiment of what each character is thinking and feeling by means of the theatre was a really good attempt at doing justice to such a complex writer &#8211; and trying to incorporate this into a film without the use of a thought bubble isn’t easy! 
The only criticism I can make of this adaptation is that you need to read the novel first. This is true of almost every other film based on a book, but, having read it, there were definitely some scenes that would make more sense and have more of an effect, had you known the back-story. The story of Constantine Levin was also somewhat neglected, being almost more of a side dish to Anna and Vronsky’s dramatic affair. 
However, despite the darkness, the tragedy and the emotional torment, there is a comforting element to Anna Karenina. This element is the contrasting, innocent and pure love between Kitty and Levin. Their journey towards each other is difficult, but it ends in a testament to the true value of virtue and patience. It ends, not in the midst of high society with its theatres and pretence, but in the country, where life is real, natural and happier on a much more profound level &#8211; where Kitty evolves from a naïve, sheltered socialite to taking charge of nursing Levin’s sick brother as he lay dying in her arms. Levin’s timidity, which was almost cringeworthy to watch at times, turns out not to be timidity but modesty. And as he stands up against Oblonsky’s almost celebrated promiscuity, it is evident that the shy Levin is a man of substance. 
However tempting it is to end with the intense and tragic conclusion of the film, I will refrain from revealing it so that you still have something to look forward to. Films (and their reviews) have marmite-like qualities to them and I feel this one especially is a love-it or hate-it movie. I loved it. But if there is one thing I would stress, it’s this: read the book. 
“He soon felt that the fulfillment of his desires gave him only one grain of the mountain of happiness he had expected. This fulfillment showed him the eternal error men make in imagining that their happiness depends on the realisation of their desires.” 
<pre>Image from: http://violettavmcreation.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/anna-karenina-keira-knightley.html</pre>

Anna Karenina: A Broken Love Affair

Officials need to increase public awareness to create revulsion against forced marriages 
&nbsp; 
For Muslims and non-Muslims alike, there is much confusion between arranged marriages &#8211; where two families, with the agreement of the bride- and groom-to-be, agree on a partnership &#8211; and forced marriages, where one side is forced into a marriage against their will. 
The issue has hit the headlines in the UK, where Home Secretary Theresa May is due to outline how forced marriage will become a <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/08/forced-marriage-criminal-offence-david-cameron" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">criminal offence</a> in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-15909237" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A similar law was introduced in Scotland in November</a>, giving courts there the power to issue protection orders to those at risk: if breached, offenders could face two years in prison. 
Consider the numbers: An estimated <a href="http://www.natcen.ac.uk/study/forced-marriage/our-findings" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">8,000 young people</a> were forced into marriages in the UK in 2009. The proportion of young men who are forced may be small (some say 15 per cent, against 85 per cent women), but they are also victims of this crime. Stories of women forced into marriage are more harrowing (with a <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17534262" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">five-year-old girl thought to have become a victim of forced marriage</a>) but a Muslim imam, Ajmal Masroor, has recently revealed his own <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/08/forced-marriage-ban" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">personal story</a> of suffering such a marriage 20 years ago and the effects it had upon him and his family. These women and men often suffer in silence; many are powerless to stand up against the cultural pressure and the emotional blackmail of their parents, families and tribes. 
Since 2008, courts in England, Wales and Northern Ireland have been able to issue civil orders, under the Forced Marriage Act, to prevent forced marriages in order to protect victims. But the government is planning to criminalise forced marriages. Is this the best solution? 
Forced marriage is not marriage, according to Islam 
The definition used by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is one adopted by the government and senior police officers (&#8220;A Choice by Right&#8221;, published by HM Government in June 2000): &#8220;A <a href="http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/honour_based_violence_and_forced_marriage/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">forced marriage</a> is a marriage conducted without the valid consent of one or both parties where duress is a factor.&#8221; 
Duress can include physical, psychological, financial, sexual and emotional pressure. As such, forced marriage is an abhorrent practice and is an indefensible abuse of human rights. It imprisons two souls without any respect and dignity for either. Some say it is little more than slavery. Victims of forced marriage, particularly women, suffer from isolation, eating disorders, depression, substance abuse and attempted suicide as well as other physical and mental illnesses. Some violence in the name of so-called honour or &#8220;honour killing&#8221; is linked with forced marriage. 
Marriage-based family life has been the bedrock of human society since the beginning of our journey on Earth and to force that union is an anathema. Love is and should be the fountain of marital union; it is a gift that human beings are bestowed with. Forced marriage tears love and sacrifices a man and a woman at the altar of others&#8217; whims. Love is the inner passion that cannot be coerced and traded with family or tribal honour and culture. 
Main world religions, particularly the Abrahamic ones, have (or should have) nothing to do with coerced partnerships. Forced marriage is <a href="http://www.christiantoday.com/article/forced.marriage.morally.and.legally.wrong.church.of.england/17281.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">&#8220;morally and legally wrong&#8221;</a>, says the Church of England. It is <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Opinion/Article.aspx?id=260564" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">against Jewish law</a> as well. 
Forced marriage is not even treated as marriage in Islam. For marriage to be valid in Islam, there must be consent of parties which is duly witnessed. The Prophet of Islam annulled a marriage which was conducted forcibly and which the woman did not accept, by saying: &#8220;If a man gives his daughter in marriage in spite of her disagreement, such a marriage is invalid.&#8221; 
It is astonishing that forced marriage is still prevalent in some, mainly tribal, cultures in the name of religion. Sadly, that includes some Muslim cultures as well. But mainstream Muslims have been outspoken against forced marriage. In a high-profile <a href="http://www.eastlondonmosque.org.uk/archive/news/151" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">seminar on forced marriage in 2009 at the East London Mosque</a>, its main imam spoke alongside legal figures and clearly stated: &#8220;Marriage is an important part of Islam; a free and willing contract between a man and woman to spend their lives together. Islam teaches us that parents are the guardians of their children&#8217;s welfare and security; forced marriages go against this teaching.&#8221; 
Is a law enforceable? 
There is a convergence of opinions between both proponents and opponents of the government proposal that forced marriage is a criminal act. However, the main issue is about whether it will be enforceable. 
The government consultation says <a href="http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/consultations/forced-marriage/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">there were strong arguments both for and against the creation of a new offence</a>. So, the question is, if a system works within existing laws, then is it necessary to use the blunt instrument of legislation to address such a complex issue, particularly when enforcements may not be easy? Those who hold the view that <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/08/forced-marriage-crime-spirit" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">it should be a crime in law</a> suggest that &#8220;it will raise awareness and it will act as a deterrent &#8211; just as it is doing in places where it has become a crime, such as Australia, Germany, Belgium, Cyprus and Denmark&#8221;. 
To opponents, the overriding concern is that criminal proceedings could deter victims, which would then lead to fewer civil or criminal sanctions, and ultimately result in <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jun/08/criminalisation-forced-marriage-push-issue-underground" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">forced marriage being driven further underground</a>. The fear that victims may not come forward cannot be underestimated. Lord Lester of Herne Hill, who introduced the Forced Marriage Bill that led to the 2008 Act, said: &#8220;There is already plenty of criminal law to tackle murder, kidnapping, abduction, rape and all the other evil manifestations associated with forcing people into marriage against their will.&#8221; He suggested that the family law approach was better than the criminal process which, he said, &#8220;has not proved to be an effective way of tackling a major social problem&#8221;. 
The other concern on criminalisation is that there are genuine grey areas between an arranged marriage and forced marriage. What about situations in which no violence or actual force is applied? It would then be extremely difficult to define whether the threshold for forced marriages has been reached. There are then the issues surrounding the intent and the &#8220;burden of proof&#8221;. 
Laws work best with the mobilisation of public opinion for them; the moral acceptance by majority population is thus important. Raising awareness about and creating a revulsion against forced marriages is vital. As criminal law already provides punishment for offences that may be committed when coercing someone into matrimony there is no necessity, in my opinion, to create a new law.
<pre>Image from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/24/prisoners-right-to-vote</pre>