<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rights for Children</title>
	<atom:link href="http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=rights-for-children</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2012 05:18:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: mindy</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4209</link>
		<dc:creator>mindy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 22:28:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4209</guid>
		<description>http://tinyurl.com/2z4fre

There&#039;s another article that talks more about this. I didn&#039;t realize it was like this before.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://tinyurl.com/2z4fre" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/2z4fre</a></p>
<p>There&#8217;s another article that talks more about this. I didn&#8217;t realize it was like this before.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jill</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4145</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4145</guid>
		<description>http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=2290

This article (sorry for the lack of HTML) says that it was granted in July 2005, which is consistent with what Hamza&#039;s father told me.

TelQuel had a different article, but my French isn&#039;t good enough to get all of the facts straight:
http://www.telquel-online.com/226/couverture_226_1.shtml

Gaouri, Islamically, what you&#039;re saying doesn&#039;t make sense - a child is only Muslim if his father is Muslim (or if he converts later in life) period.  Just like a Jew is only a Jew if his mother was a Jew.

That said, every source I find has different info and a different date.  Typical Morocco, I suppose.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=2290" rel="nofollow">http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=2290</a></p>
<p>This article (sorry for the lack of HTML) says that it was granted in July 2005, which is consistent with what Hamza&#8217;s father told me.</p>
<p>TelQuel had a different article, but my French isn&#8217;t good enough to get all of the facts straight:<br />
<a href="http://www.telquel-online.com/226/couverture_226_1.shtml" rel="nofollow">http://www.telquel-online.com/226/couverture_226_1.shtml</a></p>
<p>Gaouri, Islamically, what you&#8217;re saying doesn&#8217;t make sense &#8211; a child is only Muslim if his father is Muslim (or if he converts later in life) period.  Just like a Jew is only a Jew if his mother was a Jew.</p>
<p>That said, every source I find has different info and a different date.  Typical Morocco, I suppose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gaouri</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4107</link>
		<dc:creator>Gaouri</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:33:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4107</guid>
		<description>I think the difference is between religion  and citizenship. Before (and now) the child was muslim, but only if the father was Moroccan was he entitled to citizenship.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the difference is between religion  and citizenship. Before (and now) the child was muslim, but only if the father was Moroccan was he entitled to citizenship.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mo</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4100</link>
		<dc:creator>mo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:38:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4100</guid>
		<description>this is a new law
if only the mother were moroccan, children didn&#039;t got citizenship

sorry foir the bad english :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this is a new law<br />
if only the mother were moroccan, children didn&#8217;t got citizenship</p>
<p>sorry foir the bad english <img src='http://liosliath.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jill</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4091</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4091</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m confused as well, but if filiation is even made a point (regarding children of a Moroccan mother being citizens), then it must be because of intermarriage with foreigners, no?

I use the Moudawana as a class discussion topic sometimes, and the students have always told me (since I started in 2005, that is) that children of a Moroccan mother/foreign father are still Moroccan.  Hamza&#039;s dad (lawyer) told me the same, so I don&#039;t know what the change is with this new law.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m confused as well, but if filiation is even made a point (regarding children of a Moroccan mother being citizens), then it must be because of intermarriage with foreigners, no?</p>
<p>I use the Moudawana as a class discussion topic sometimes, and the students have always told me (since I started in 2005, that is) that children of a Moroccan mother/foreign father are still Moroccan.  Hamza&#8217;s dad (lawyer) told me the same, so I don&#8217;t know what the change is with this new law.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Felix</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4068</link>
		<dc:creator>Felix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2007 16:48:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4068</guid>
		<description>Wait a minute, that Moudwana link just talks about filiation in general - I can&#039;t find a reference to children of mixed marriages. 

Here&#039;s what another article had to say about this new law: 

&quot;It also complements the reform made to the Family Law (Mudawana), the personal-status law established in 1957, which stipulates that Moroccan citizenship can only be transmitted to children born of a Moroccan father, those of single mothers or of a stateless father.&quot;

Now I&#039;m confused.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wait a minute, that Moudwana link just talks about filiation in general &#8211; I can&#8217;t find a reference to children of mixed marriages. </p>
<p>Here&#8217;s what another article had to say about this new law: </p>
<p>&#8220;It also complements the reform made to the Family Law (Mudawana), the personal-status law established in 1957, which stipulates that Moroccan citizenship can only be transmitted to children born of a Moroccan father, those of single mothers or of a stateless father.&#8221;</p>
<p>Now I&#8217;m confused.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Felix</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4067</link>
		<dc:creator>Felix</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2007 16:36:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4067</guid>
		<description>Hm, that&#039;s odd. I&#039;ve looked over the 2004 Moudawana, of course - got one of the first translations from the above mentioned organization, actually - but I have to confess, I just skimmed over the kid parts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hm, that&#8217;s odd. I&#8217;ve looked over the 2004 Moudawana, of course &#8211; got one of the first translations from the above mentioned organization, actually &#8211; but I have to confess, I just skimmed over the kid parts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jill</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4058</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2007 09:51:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4058</guid>
		<description>http://www.hrea.org/moudawana.html#31

This English translation of the Moudawana states that filiation is established through either parent, whether the parentage relationship is legitimate or illegitimate.  

And that&#039;s from 2004.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.hrea.org/moudawana.html#31" rel="nofollow">http://www.hrea.org/moudawana.html#31</a></p>
<p>This English translation of the Moudawana states that filiation is established through either parent, whether the parentage relationship is legitimate or illegitimate.  </p>
<p>And that&#8217;s from 2004.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jill</title>
		<link>http://liosliath.com/blog/2007/01/21/rights-for-children/#comment-4057</link>
		<dc:creator>Jill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Jan 2007 09:47:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://liosliath.com/blog/?p=192#comment-4057</guid>
		<description>From what I understand, this has been in effect for two years already - at least that&#039;s what Moroccan friends and one woman married to a Moroccan told me (I don&#039;t want kids, so it&#039;s a moot point for me).  

Western men DO have to convert to marry a Moroccan woman, of course.  I don&#039;t believe anything has changed.

As for the first point, a friend of mine (American) who has several children from a Moroccan was able, two years ago, to apply for citizenship for her children (which she was not able to do before that); that&#039;s why I&#039;m surprised that this article calls the bill new.  I had thought it was already just a part of the Moudawana.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From what I understand, this has been in effect for two years already &#8211; at least that&#8217;s what Moroccan friends and one woman married to a Moroccan told me (I don&#8217;t want kids, so it&#8217;s a moot point for me).  </p>
<p>Western men DO have to convert to marry a Moroccan woman, of course.  I don&#8217;t believe anything has changed.</p>
<p>As for the first point, a friend of mine (American) who has several children from a Moroccan was able, two years ago, to apply for citizenship for her children (which she was not able to do before that); that&#8217;s why I&#8217;m surprised that this article calls the bill new.  I had thought it was already just a part of the Moudawana.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

