Hello gang!
You have all heard of the case annulled marriage between two Muslims, for non virginity of the wife. Everyone has an opinion about this trial, but he has no one legitimate opinion?
reminder, the spouse seeking the annulment (procedure that dissolves a marriage as if it never happened) from his marriage because his wife had lied about her virginity. He claims that virginity is a major cause of the quality of a wife. According to Article 180 of the Civil Code, if an error occurs on an essential quality of a husband, annulment Marriage is possible.
The question is therefore whether virginity is an essential quality in a person. Yes to the husband. Yes and not for morality and justice. From a moral point of view, opinions differ just because everyone has a moral. But from a legal standpoint, there is nothing shocking.
You know, legally, you can cancel the marriage if it is discovered that her husband is divorced. Is this legal? I do not know. What I know is that it is difficult to define the essential qualities of a person. The status of divorced it an essential quality?
Virginity is essential? I do not think it There is only ONE legitimate response . It depends on each. For some it is sacred for others they must be disposed as soon as possible. It's so subjective! How can we legislate this? The religion preaches virginity before marriage but rare are those practitioners at the point of waiting for marriage. The French legal advocates the freedom to lose her virginity before marriage as the envy of everyone. So ok, everyone chose to follow the tenets of his religion or personal morality. But I believe that justice should not judge that.
Religion offers an objective response. Morality provides a subjective response. Justice must not only offer protection. How can she protect spouses in refusing to annul the marriage, then they want both? The wife also wants the marriage annulled so what justice would protect her?
In addition, I also wonder: How can a man still judge a woman on her virginity? How does God judge the behavior of the husband? I do not know.
But what I know is that we can not juridiquemnt define the essential qualities of a person. We all have different views on a person, so we each have a conception of its own essential qualities. For example
What do you think of the singer Amy Winehouse? For me, its essential quality is her talent. But for others, what is essential is that it's a drug addict so they refuse to buy his records. Imagine that justice is trying to judge whether we could buy his music as its essential quality ....
This example is not terrible but it nevertheless demonstrates the impossibility of justice to rule on that.
So there are areas in which the courts should not attempt to penetrate because it is at odds with religion or morality. The problem with marriage is that it is obliged to meet religious requirements, moral and legal same time. It is imperative for justice to allow the freedom to choose their way of life in areas such as personal as marriage.
Anyway this is my humble opinion I submit to your ruling my valuable readers)
Bye!
0 comments:
Post a Comment