Posted on 02/19/2007 4:33:42 PM PST by Mfkmmof4
Under Jewish law, a man must grant his wife a divorce degree, or get, to end a marriage. Without it, a Jewish woman is unable to remarry within the faith, and she becomes known as an agunah, or "chained woman."
Advocates of the bill say husbands use this power to demand favorable custody or visitation schedules - or money from their wife's family - during divorce negotiations.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
Jewish feminists are DEAD WRONG on this.
FReepMail to be added or removed from this pro-Israel/Judaic/Russian Jewry ping list.
Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.
If this isn't, I don't know what is! Secular lawmakers should keep their big noses out of strictly religious affairs. But, I don't see the left crying foul anytime soon.
Unbelievable. I'm speechless.
It's not about enforcement of halachah by secular law, but about modifying it by secular law. Precisely what must be done to sharia.
If one is coercerd to give a get by a secular government, is it a valid get? Even if the woman gets her US court mandated get, would it hold up in a religeous court (beis din)? Would an orthodox man marry a woman who received a get this way?
It is the same sort of stupidity that Israel gets into with its "right of return" policies that abandon Jewish law. It creates a situation where pedigrees for birth and marriage records will be required by future generations. Why not say that the reality of this law is simply an outrageous attack on the Torah and religious Jews.
Yes.
I'm from Maryland and am close with many Republican State Delegates. This is unbelievable. They tell me that its not even the Rats that are pushing this bill, but some radical leftists ultra secularist jewish organizations that really have it in for the Orthodox.
those filing for divorce or not contesting one to also file an affidavit stating that they had removed all religious barriers to remarriage within their power.
I presume this means state enforced annulments for Catholics as well.
The Christian religion also?
Annulment for Catholics is not necessarily within the control of the (putatively) non-spouses. However, one could see the government's attempting to require declarations of nullity any time a secular divorce proceeding occurs.
It would be interesting.
This is not unlike the types of things the left in Israel, the Reform in Pre-Nazi Germany, and the Haskala movement in Czarist Russia attempted to use to attack religious Jews with. It is the kind of thing that creates violence between Jews and emboldens non-Jews in Jew hatred.
If one wanted to look for a positive in this, it is simply that the growth of the observant Jews in this country has created a large problem for the non-observant. They cannot compete with day schools, yeshivas, and the larger birth rate of traditional Jews. This is a public attempt at what the secular have been trying to do in private for many years.
ISTR that feminists have been promoting various forms of "agunah" legislation for at least 20 years. The editor of "The Jewish Press" became involved after his daughter went through a particularly nasty divorce.
Passing these kind of laws will do nothing for the "poor, oppressed Orthodox women" for whom the feminists show such open contempt, but will provide a "camel's nose" for sharia enthusiasts.
But what is the meaning of "removing all barriers".
I think this is a solution for which there is no problem. I'll defer to Alouette. There are sanctions available whithin the Jewish communint in the case of a husband refusing to grant a get. I doubt there are many civil divorces initiated by Orthodox husbands where there's a refusal. My guess, it's the it's the wife initiating civil proceedings.
In any case, it's not a civil matter. Sometimes I think it would be better for the state to be out of the marriage business alltogether.
The government should get out of the marriage business. All they can do is destroy the institution. The irreversible interests of the state and the interests of the various religious and cultural traditions involved are ultimately incompatible.
The state could be in the business of registering domestic partnerships, if that turns out to be a necessary thing. For the purposes of child custody or inheritance, perhaps this would be a useful thing. But whatever the state does should be completely apart from any religious or cultural institution of marriage.
That way the state can do whatever it wants to do with it's domestic partnership regulations, and it can leave traditional marriage to others.
GMTA. Such a position would save us all this wrangling over gay marriage as well.
States all over the country are setting up parallel civil union statutes in order to "fudge" the gay marriage issue. Let the states make the full transition to this standard, and leave the churches and other traditional structures out of it.
Well, that's the question. A Catholic can be divorced and remarried under civil law, but not in the Church. I assume the same is the case for Orthodox Jews. Therefore, there's no legal barrier to a remarriage, under current law.
It seems to me that the proposed law is requiring a religious sanction, over the objections of the religious body, just as much as if the government required all religious organizations to celebrate homosexual marriage. Perhaps that's even the real agenda behind the legislation!
Obviously, yes. Isn't that what the First Amendment is really about?
"Agunah" is a very complex situation in Jewish law and each case has to be addressed individually. The feminists have pounced on this issue like alley cats on raw meat. There is no "one size fits all" solution to unique family situations.
The feminists like to portray the "agunah" issue as innocent, helpless women being victimized by cruel patriarchy. The facts in most cases that require civil intervention, is that both parties are at fault. When lawyers and money get involved, everything goes down the toilet real fast.
It could be, depending on the theory of the legislation.
If a couple cares about a Get it is likely they were married with a Ketubah. If done right the terms of any Get would be spelled out in the Ketubah and the Ketubah may very well be a valid contract for all civil purposes.
Legislation to afford such contracts standing to seek specific performance may very well be Constitutional because religious law is not the issue. Just a legally enforceable valid contract entered into by competent parties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.