This story is actually a month old, but I hadn't seen it until today, so I'm posting it belatedly, and felt the urgent need to do so given its horrific nature.
Saudi women’s rights advocates are outraged after a 12-year-old girl was sold by her father into marriage with an 80-year-old man.
A Saudi father, whose name has not been released, sold his 12-year-old daughter to his 80-year old cousin for the equivalent of $22,600 (around £14,600). The elderly man, who lives in the city of Buraidah, stands accused of raping the girl after the wedding, causing her to have to be taken to the hospital due to the injuries she sustained. He has previously married three other young girls.
Also, check out the background information provided in the article:
Child marriages in Saudi Arabia have made international news a number of times over the past year. In April there was international outcry when a Saudi judge refused to grant a divorce to an eight-year-old girl who had been married off by her father to a 47-year-old man as part of a loan repayment agreement, and in August a 10-year-old bride ran away from her 80-year-old husband and sought refuge at her aunt’s house. After ten days in hiding, the girl was returned to her husband by her father.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Saudi Arabia has signed and ratified, defines a child as any person under the age of 18 and Article 16.2 of The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, states that “The marriage of a child shall have no legal effect, and all necessary action, including legislation, shall be taken to specify a minimum age for marriage and to make the registration of marriages in an official registry compulsory.”
Saudi Arabia, which ratified the convention in September 2000, did so with the stated reservation that “In case of contradiction between any term of the Convention and the norms of Islamic law, the Kingdom is not under obligation to observe the contradictory terms of the Convention.”
But hey, who cares? I mean, after all, only "Islamophobes" find this kind of thing despicable, don't they? And only Islamophobes would dream of pointing out the Islamic teachings - which are alluded to in the linked article, and then flimsily dismissed - that serve as justification for such acts of inhuman vileness?
Of course, only Islamophobes would do such a thing. Leftists tell us so, and they are such enlightened folk. Back to sleep.