Multiple legal systems

We all know, I'm sure, that divorce is regulated by a secular statute.
Now consider a person of a particular religious group, such as Muslims, (altho the faith under discussion doesn't matter,) who have in their religion their own procedures. What I mean is, even if the state says that a Muslim is divorced, the religion's leaders may still consider the couple still married. They, as individuals may not remarry without fulfilling the religion's requirements for divorce.
Should the state recognize the religion's law against remarrying, and deny the individuals a secular marriage license, which would mean marrying outside of the faith?

Mark Norby said:

We all know, I'm sure, that divorce is regulated by a secular statute.
Now consider a person of a particular religious group, such as Muslims, (altho the faith under discussion doesn't matter,) who have in their religion their own procedures. What I mean is, even if the state says that a Muslim is divorced, the religion's leaders may still consider the couple still married. They, as individuals may not remarry without fulfilling the religion's requirements for divorce.
Should the state recognize the religion's law against remarrying, and deny the individuals a secular marriage license, which would mean marrying outside of the faith?

Hi Mark

I don't think that civil marriage law should coddle any religious customs. Same rules for everybody, regardless of religion or lack of it.

If a person wants to voluntarily follow a religious marriage custom, then who cares? It is the person's choice.

Numerically in the USA, perhaps Muslims would be a minority example. Catholics have stricter marriage/divorce rules than civil law. Some Jewish sects have strict ideas on the topic, or so I read. Dunno much about it and am easily fooled.

http://www.jewfaq.org/gentiles.htm

"Interfaith Marriages

I once received a message from a man who told me that many Jews do not like gentiles. He knew this because his (Jewish) girlfriend's friends and parents disapproved of him. I explained that these people did not disapprove of him because he was Christian; they disapproved of him because he was a Christian dating a Jew, which is another issue altogether.

Traditional Judaism does not permit interfaith marriages. The Torah states that the children of such marriages would be lost to Judaism (Deut. 7:3-4), and experience has shown the truth of this passage all too well. The 2000 National Jewish Population Survey found that only a third of interfaith couples raise their children Jewish, despite increasing efforts in the Reform and Conservative communities to welcome interfaith couples."

Perhaps one could easily find other common "western" religions that are much pickier on the topic than civil law.

Civil Marriage is just that, civil marriage. If someone chooses to be a member of a religion or other group, that is their own personal choice and they are free as far as the state is concerned to interpret the rules and regulations of the religion as they desire. If someone who professes to be member of a certain religion or group decides to behave in a manner that may differ with the rules and regulations of the religion or group, that is no business of the state's, that is between the individuals and the organization.

If I were a member of a bicycle club that believed operating a motor vehicle over 45 mph were a violation of world harmony, I would not expect the government to ticket me if I happen to drive a motor vehicle over 45mph on the freeway. That's between me and the members of my club.

Jon Isaacs

Hi Mark,
This looks like a follow up to my "Needs of an Open Society" thread.

The state should stay out of church law, during and after any divorce proceeding. Also more of a legal point, if the state grants a divorce, that state cannot then restrict a marriage.

My reason for the other thread was our society in general showing a shift towards intollerance.

I could see cases like human or even animal sacrifice being restricted by a government. However there are a few gray areas.

It's been nearly twenty years now, but back in Missouri a fourteen year old girl was badly injured in a car accident. She was a minor and in need of immediate medical attention. However at that point in time her injuries were not overwhelming.

Her family did not believe in doctors, and gently placed her on a beat up matress in the back of a pickup truck, then drove her home where she died the next day. Strange that they believed in pickup trucks.

At that point in Missouri's history the police were powerless to insist she be taken to a hospital. This brought up two questions.

One, should the state be our keeper? In other words; to what degree should society protect a minor from the actions, beliefs and traditions of her parents?

Two, Is this a case of the state bowing to religious law? In so doing we failed to protect a minor where the immediate care of qualified medical proffessionals could very likely have saved her life.

Just food for thought...
Thanks,
Steve

Mark Norby said:

We all know, I'm sure, that divorce is regulated by a secular statute.
Now consider a person of a particular religious group, such as Muslims, (altho the faith under discussion doesn't matter,) who have in their religion their own procedures. What I mean is, even if the state says that a Muslim is divorced, the religion's leaders may still consider the couple still married. They, as individuals may not remarry without fulfilling the religion's requirements for divorce.
Should the state recognize the religion's law against remarrying, and deny the individuals a secular marriage license, which would mean marrying outside of the faith?

No. Absolutely not. The bolded part would violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

Civil marriage includes the grant of certain rights, privileges and obligations by the state. There is a secular motivation (a benefit to society) and secular enforcement (divorce laws, property division and child support.) It is an entirely secular institution.

Religious marriage is an entirely non-secular sacrament granted or annulled by various religious authorities. From the state’s perspective there is only one permissible point of overlap, the use of the word "marriage" and the fact that both civil and religious marriages are often formalized in one combined (but still clearly two-part) ceremony.

Jim

Nope. There are theocracies where people who believe such things should live.