[lit-ideas] Re: Will Britain accept Sharia Law?
- From: Judith Evans <judithevans001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 10:07:17 +0100 (BST)
>>>>>>>>
Judy, do you happen to know, or have ever heard, about women being
threatened into agreement to any of this, such as in divorce or custody
issues?
<<<<<<<<<
I don't know of any. I've read on the web that it happens. Obviously if so the
ruling would be null and void (for what that's worth in the case of divorce).
NB
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I know of a second generation Muslim woman (my
friend) who got married in a mosque without a state marriage license which is
required. She couldn't get a divorce without her husband agreeing.
She won't tell me but I think she paid him to obtain consent.
The person giving the divorce is the imam.
I can't imagine a Catholic, Protestant or Jewish clergy person officiating
at a marriage without a state license. It's required
<<<<<<<<<<
Let me explain the situation here .
1. Here, Muslim marriages are not recognised by law. Equally, a Jewish
marriage carried out in a synagogue not registered for the purpose is not
recognised by law. Etc.. Any religion can carry out a marriage ceremony -- if
you like, "marriage ceremony", as can any non-religion (humanist can)/. Any
religion can impose rules that follow from that -- in Roman Catholicism, say,
basically, no divorce . And any religion can decide who decides to grant a
*religious* divorce from the *religious* marriage.
2. So here, the woman you mention would not be married in the eyes of the
law. See the discussion here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8493660.stm
3. Would the civil authorities, the state, have any say in her Muslim divorce
if she were?
4. No. Not so far as I can tell, anyway. How could they? The effect of the
divorce is that the parties to the dissolved marriage can contract another
*Muslim* marriage, the state has no say in that.
5. Would abolishing Muslim tribunals/"Sharia courts" make any difference to
this situation?
6. No. No, because they cannot -- for example -- force a Muslim (etc.) church
to marry a couple one of whom is, according to the rules of that church, still
married. That that person has a civil divorce and can re-marry in a civil
ceremony is irrelevant.
I have a feeling we discussed this issue before, and I said then the only
answer, which is clearly unacceptable and also unworkable, is to ban all
religious marriages and all non-state mediation. Requiring that the parties to
all such marriages also enter into a civil marriage will not do anything to
prevent the problem you describe, here, anyway. Here, if a woman is married
according to UK law and according to Muslim law (etc.), and she cannot get a
divorce under Muslim law, she can't marry again in a Muslim church. I'd have
thought it was the same in Canada.
Judy Evans, Cardiff, UK
--- On Thu, 8/9/11, Veronica Caley <molleo1@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Veronica Caley <molleo1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Will Britain accept Sharia Law?
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Thursday, 8 September, 2011, 23:24
Judy:The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that
both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their
case.
Judy, do you happen to know, or have ever heard, about women being
threatened into agreement to any of this, such as in divorce or custody
issues?
The reason I ask is because I know of a second generation Muslim woman (my
friend) who got married in a mosque without a state marriage license which is
required. She couldn't get a divorce without her husband agreeing.
She won't tell me but I think she paid him to obtain consent.
The person giving the divorce is the imam.
I can't imagine a Catholic, Protestant or Jewish clergy person officiating
at a marriage without a state license. It's required.
Veronica Caley
Milford, MI
Other related posts:
