Comments on: New French Muslim chief on the “virginity lie” case http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/06/24/new-french-muslim-chief-on-the-virginity-lie-case/ Religion, faith and ethics Sat, 23 Apr 2016 23:25:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Ben E http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/06/24/new-french-muslim-chief-on-the-virginity-lie-case/comment-page-1/#comment-4536 Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:51:02 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/06/24/new-french-muslim-chief-on-the-virginity-lie-case/#comment-4536 Because the spouses are Muslims, many people seem determined to ignore the basic principle involved, which, from the point of view of secular civil law has NOTHING to do with religion. This is not about Islam or any other religion and the legal basis of the request by the husband to have the civil authorities declare the civil contract of marriage null and void is not directly founded in religion. The law would be the same if the parties were atheists. According to the news reports, the women has admitted that she lied about her virginity because she knew that her virginity was an important consideration for the man in deciding whether or not to marry her. She committed a civil fraud by lying about a matter that was for the other party to the marriage contract an essential condition. Since the man’s decision to marry was fraduently induced, the contrat is null and void. Matrimony (whether Muslim, Christian or Jewish) may be a rite of religion, but marriage as a civil contract registered by the State and creating particular rights and obligations for the contracting parties is NOT a religious matter in a secular State. Some have said that since both the man and woman no longer wish to be married, they should apply to the civil courts for an ordinary divorce. There may be unjust consequences if they take that approach. If there is an annulment, the marriage never existed (legally speaking) and on new obligations are incombent on the parties. If there is a divorce, there may well be financial repercussions, such as division of property, lump-sum settlement payment, partition of public and private pension plan benefits, etc. Since the woman admittedly committed fraud by using false pretenses to induce the man into marriage, a contract he would have otherwise refused, there was obviously no “meeting of the minds”, a requirement in law for a contract to be valid. The annulment order was proper and it is really a shame that the French Justice Ministry as set it aside and forced a rehearing. Whether you or I would consider virginity (or any other criterion) relevant to marriage is beside the point. If the woman said nothing before the marriage and the man had never inquired as to her virginity before the marriage, it would be impossible under secular civil law for him to seek an annulment if the later found out that she was not a virgin when he married her. As some religious scholars have mentioned, even in Islamic law, in that case, the marriage would have been valid since non-chasity is not in absolute impediment to Muslim marriage.

]]>
By: Neil Barr http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/06/24/new-french-muslim-chief-on-the-virginity-lie-case/comment-page-1/#comment-4531 Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:46:03 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2008/06/24/new-french-muslim-chief-on-the-virginity-lie-case/#comment-4531 So is this man so special as to deserve a virgin? It would be interesting to see his history with other women or his web browsing! I don’t think there is much love in his petty little self-centered heart.

Another victim of narrow thinking.

Neil in Atlanta

]]>