Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Outrage as French judge annuls Muslim marriage over bride's virginity lie
The Times (UK) ^ | May 31, 2008 | Charles Bremner in Paris

Posted on 06/01/2008 9:08:54 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

The annulment of a young Muslim couple’s marriage because the bride was not a virgin has caused anger in France, prompting President Sarkozy’s party to call for a change in the law.

The decision by a court in Lille was condemned by the Government, media, feminists and civil rights organisations after it was reported in a legal journal on Thursday. Patrick Devedjian, leader of the ruling Union for a Popular Movement, said it was unacceptable that the law could be used for religious reasons to repudiate a bride. It must be modified “to put an end to this extremely disturbing situation”, he said.

The case, which had previously gone unreported, involved an engineer in his 30s, named as Mr X, who married Ms Y, a student nurse in her 20s, in 2006. The wedding night party was still under way at the family’s home in Roubaix when the groom came down from the bedroom complaining that his bride was not a virgin. He could not display the blood-stained sheet that is traditionally exhibited as proof of the bride’s “purity”.

Mr X went to court the following morning and was granted a annulment on the grounds that his bride had deceived him on “one of the essential elements” of the marriage. In disgrace with both families, she acknowledged that she had led her groom to believe that she was a virgin when she had already had sexual intercourse. She did not oppose the annulment.

Critics ran out of superlatives to condemn what they depicted as a dangerous aberration. Valérie Létard, Minister for Women’s Rights, said that she was “shocked to see that today in France the civil law can be used to diminish the status of women”.

(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: eurabia; europe; france; frenchmuslims; islam

1 posted on 06/01/2008 9:08:54 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Hey, annulment is a step in the right direction for non-virgins. They usually just do an honor killing.


2 posted on 06/01/2008 9:10:52 AM PDT by TruthShallSetYouFree (Abortion is to family planning what bankruptcy is to financial planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Most non virgins know what to do to give the allusion she is a virgin.


3 posted on 06/01/2008 9:14:50 AM PDT by peggybac (Tolerance is the virtue of believing in nothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

To be strictly fair, marriages entered into as a result of deception by one party generally allow the other party an anullment, regardless of the subject of the dishonesty.

While I’m not a huge fan of the Muslim obsession with virginity, I fail to see why this “escape clause” should be disallowed simply because the lie involves a sexual matter.


4 posted on 06/01/2008 9:14:50 AM PDT by Sherman Logan (Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. - A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I don’t have a problem with this. She lied about something very important to the guy and to his perception of marriage.

A divorce, at least, should be granted.


5 posted on 06/01/2008 9:17:04 AM PDT by ConservativeMind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

So the hubby wanted to show off a blood stained sheet to his buddies after his wedding night... and feminists bitch about locker room baudiness of western males.

Sorry, but a culture that shows off a bloody sheet as tradition isn’t one I’d rate as worth much other than condemnation.


6 posted on 06/01/2008 9:20:15 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

The Judge should have given the Groom a goat as a substitute.


7 posted on 06/01/2008 9:21:01 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (168 grains of instant conflict resolution)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I understand the issue of a contract. That doesn't alter the fact that, for the most part, Muslin men are insecure animals.
8 posted on 06/01/2008 9:22:13 AM PDT by WellyP (How much does Huma know?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

She only lied about sex, and as we all now know, everybody lies about that, so it is no big thing.


9 posted on 06/01/2008 9:22:33 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay
This used to be rather common.

Still, knowing Moslem guys I'd say they tend to have no concern whatsoever with the state of virtinity of the whores they pay for services.

10 posted on 06/01/2008 9:23:24 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WellyP

The judge gave the girl an opportunity to save her own life. If her family and his were this barbaric to require virginity of her but not him she’s probably safer away from them all. Hope she takes this opportunity to find out about other religions and options for civilized beings of any gender.


11 posted on 06/01/2008 9:25:19 AM PDT by BabsC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WellyP

Maybe he just doesn’t want to get a disease.


12 posted on 06/01/2008 9:25:36 AM PDT by donna (The United States Constitution and the Koran are mutually exclusive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: donna
But it's ok if she does?
13 posted on 06/01/2008 9:26:51 AM PDT by BabsC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

“Union for a Popular Movement”

What a great name.......Covers just about all bases.


14 posted on 06/01/2008 9:27:28 AM PDT by EggsAckley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

The Muslims vs. the Humanists.

Popcorn time.

I agree that the legitimate reason of deception can count to annul the marriage.

There’s nothing wrong with virginity being desired in a marriage partner. It took that to offend the humanistic French establishment.

Islam has been pushing secular Europe around for quite a bit and they finally get upset.

But when you cut away all the crap, fanatic Muslims and liberal secularists are all Humanistic and legalistic.

They are the modern day Pharisees and Sadducees.

Jesus would tell people to avoid their ideas and we should all do the same.


15 posted on 06/01/2008 9:33:13 AM PDT by Nextrush (MCCAIN, OBAMA, CLINTON......WHAT A CHOICE?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TruthShallSetYouFree

The last thing she should want is to remain married to this guy. I’m sure she wants to keep breathing.


16 posted on 06/01/2008 9:38:57 AM PDT by popdonnelly (Does Obama know ANYONE who likes America, capitalism, or white people?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

I’m with you on this. She deceived her fiance on a very basic matter before going into the marriage. I expect this would be grounds for a divorce or annulment in western law as well, although the process would take a lot longer.

You can criticize Muslims for a lot of their ideas about marriage, and their treatment of wives, but I don’t think that excuses lying to your partner in a solemn marriage vow, which amounts to violating a solemn oath.

The French, of course, tend to think that in marriage anything goes. So maybe she should have repudiated her Muslim religion and married a Frenchman.


17 posted on 06/01/2008 9:46:53 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

This used to be extremely common in all European cultures. In eastern and southern Europe I believe as late as the early half of the last century.

Not making excuses for the bloody sheet crowd, just pointing out that western civ got away from it pretty recently.


18 posted on 06/01/2008 9:47:31 AM PDT by Sherman Logan (Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. - A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BabsC

Who said that?


19 posted on 06/01/2008 10:15:49 AM PDT by donna (The United States Constitution and the Koran are mutually exclusive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

The judge did her a favor.


20 posted on 06/01/2008 10:24:17 AM PDT by buck jarret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Government shouldn’t be involved in recognizing marriages at all. As long as they are, though, annulling a marriage on the grounds of ANY sort of fraud doesn’t strike me as a problem. If this bride represented to her would-be husband that she was a virgin, and he married her in the belief that she had told the truth, under basic contract law, the contract is null and void. Same concept would apply if a man represented to a prospective bride that he was very wealthy, and she discovered after the wedding that all the fancy cars and homes he’d used to convince her of this were actually on loan from friends, and he was actually up to ears in debt, marriage contract should be null and void, just like any business contract in which one party had used to fraud to induce the other party to enter into the contract.


21 posted on 06/01/2008 10:37:47 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
While I’m not a huge fan of the Muslim obsession with virginity, I fail to see why this “escape clause” should be disallowed simply because the lie involves a sexual matter.


22 posted on 06/01/2008 10:38:20 AM PDT by Paleo Conservative (1984 was supposed to be a warning not an instruction manual!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

“He could not display the blood-stained sheet that is traditionally exhibited as proof of the bride’s “purity”.

That is flat-out gross! What country would want people like that living in its boundries?


23 posted on 06/01/2008 10:44:55 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued (If Islam conquers the world, the Earth will be at peace because the human race will be killed off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

“What country would want people like that living in its boundries?”

US, Canada, all of Europe, Australia... Fill in the blanks.


24 posted on 06/01/2008 10:58:37 AM PDT by 353FMG (What marxism and fascism could not destroy, liberalism did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

Does the man have to be a virgin?
Does he have to prove it?


25 posted on 06/01/2008 11:54:08 AM PDT by Taffini (Mr. Pippin and Mr. Waffles do not approve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

Yup. Somehow we’ve gone from thinking that sexual misdeeds should be treated more strictly than others, to thinking they should be treated the same, to the notion that deceit and perjury don’t matter if they involve sex in any way.


26 posted on 06/01/2008 12:06:30 PM PDT by Sherman Logan (Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves. - A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

Well,...they don’t wait for an invite.


27 posted on 06/01/2008 12:19:16 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Taffini

I haven’t heard it for a while, but there used to be a phrase right here in the West: “double standard.”

That was mostly resolved in the secular culture by dropping the rules for both parties.


28 posted on 06/01/2008 12:33:37 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I wonder if the groom was a virgin?


29 posted on 06/01/2008 3:44:16 PM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I wonder if the groom was a virgin?


30 posted on 06/01/2008 3:44:24 PM PDT by rawhide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donna

Sorry, I thought that was the implication of your response. She was impartial to getting a disease because she didn’t inquire into his state of virginity.


31 posted on 06/02/2008 5:35:09 AM PDT by BabsC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson