Muslim wives legally invisible

Catholic clergy aren't necessarily licenced to perform legal weddings, and a few of us have said it seems uncommon amongst Catholic priests these days. This is actually the same position as Hindu, Sikh and Muslim clerics, who can be legal celebrants but aren't necessarily. It's the C of E that's different, which is due to them being the state religion. Not sure about Jewish.

But also, it's not something the state can oblige ministers to do, in order to be allowed to perform religious rituals. It does in fact impose extra cost and requirements, since becoming a legal registrar isn't free. And they don't necessarily want to do it. Many clergy are very busy already without taking on additional duties that could be performed by someone else. The state isn't going to tell them they need to be legal celebrants in order to say a particular form of words, and nor should it try.

When you look at it, what is the actual difference?
Nikah isn't a legal marriage in any of the countries mentioned - unless combined with the state defined registration (which in the Nordic cases might be done by the same person if licensed), which is about the same as in the UK.

In some countries it is just illegal to perform Nikah (without estate registration). In some countries the mosques self-regulate and won't perform it without state registration first.

It sounds that the mosques in the England are the only ones cheeky enough to perform their legally worthless ceremony and not caring about the wellbeing of the women they are marrying.
(I'm aware some mosques are self -regulating as well).

So, yes. I suppose I agree with you, that it should be made illegal. Good luck with the riots.

It’s concerning for others to see this happen as the judgement day part is not helping the women and girls who are facing it.

There is absolutely nothing in the quran to do with Honour killings. It is a sin to murder and abuse. If youre not happy with your child because of their choice of who to marry, and you kill them for it. Then you have created a major sin.
13.71 Do not kill your children for fear of poverty. We provide for them and for you. Surely killing them is a heinous sin.

In relation to forced marriage, you absolutely cannot force someone to marry someone. It's a sin in itself. It is stated throughout hadiths (sayings/teachings of the prophet Muhammed PBUH) THAT it is a sin to force someone to marry someone and is completely Haram (not allowed in Islam) and that the marriage contract therefore is invalid. If such a person goes ahead and forces their daughter/niece for example to marry someone and they clearly dont want to, they have committed a sin.

Child marriage is also a sin. If a man marries a minor and she's clearly school age/underage then hes a slimeball. There is nothing in the quran the says its ok to marry small children /young teens.

FGM is absolutely nothing a practice in islam but a barbaric practice in certain parts of Africa. There is nothing in the quran that states to circumsice the girls. There is of course in islam , circumcision on boys, even the Jews do it and jesus himself was circumcised. Even Christian men in Africa are circumcised.
The fgm is absolutely awful. The removal of the clitoris and stitching up the labia is a practice that is so dreadful and backwards, I have no words for that. They feel that the stimulation of the clitoris is too vulgar for a woman and that they want to preserve her virginity until she's married which is why they stitch up her labia.
This is nothing to do with islam but rather backward communities who have been doing it for donkeys years. I also wish it wasn't happening.

No woman is stoned or beheaded for being raped. If the woman is stoned then it goes against shariah law.
It is rather the man who would be stoned or given a hundred lashes with a whip in public which is rightly so. However if a man was to commit adultery he would also get 100 lashes and a woman would get the same however the man would be exposed to the public and the woman would wear a head covering to protect her identity.

Women most certainly can leave the house for whatever they want, shopping with friends, popping to rhe supermarket, going to the library, go for coffee or go to a book shop. And women do have the right to pursue education, in fact the first ever university was founded by MUSLIM WOMEN.
Muslim women have the right to educate and build themselves property or businesses and the entitlement to keep all her money to herself from whatever she earns.
Yes, women do ask permission from their husbands to go outside and this is based on the fact that there are not so many safe areas in the world and it's the husbands duty as her protector and her provider to know where she is. For example of a woman said to her husband "oh honey, I want to go to Burlington to pick up a coffee table i found on Facebook. " and he says actually babe not a good idea that's a really rough area, full of drugs and thugs. " wouldn't she be better off staying home and leaving it. Or go somewhere where she could possibly be harmed. Besides a more respectful and courteous thing, to say by the way I have made plans with Anna to meet for lunch, or he would say I'm meeting Bilal to go to prayer at the mosque. Couples do do this. He might say well you know I heard theres a protest about the flags and illegals coming here, and they might see you and have a pop at you , youre better off staying home with me love" hardly the crime of the century.

If women are being opressed and not allowed to go to the hospital or opticians, or she's being forced to marry someone or hit or forced to do things she doesn't want to do , then hes the one in the wrong. Islam is not telling him to do these things.
If these countries such Afghanistan blocks women from going to school or forces everyone to wear niqab then they're going against the Islamic rules and teachings of the quran.
And they will face God on judgement day for this.

Hope that helps clarify.

Things may well have changed by now, but when I got married in my local Baptist Church (50 years ago) we had to have a registrar present and had to say the vows of a civil ceremony ("I call upon these persons here present, to witness that I ..." etc), in addition to the religious ones ("to have and to hold, in sickness and in health..." etc), in order for the marriage to be legally binding and for us to be issued with a marriage certificate.

We had to visit the registry office in person several weeks in advance, in order that our intended marriage could be made public (the civil equivalent of C of E marriage banns).

I was under the impression that the only religious weddings that were legally recognised were those that took place in an Anglican church.

I don’t think that’s connected at all. Inter family marriages are risky for everyone- this is an issue in other cultures as well as Pakistani/ Bangladeshi ones so absolutely not isolated, and happens, albeit it uncommonly, in the general population too.

I assume by “telling other woman how they should live” is based on the forced and arranged marriages that lead to Cousin relationships? This is at the crux of the whole thread, I’d say. These women need to be protected, and are, by British law.

Usually gurdwara’s are usually registered and recognised as places who can carry out civil marriages. Most people we know have both done during the Sikh ceremony.

I think it is more to do with the fact that telling other woman how they should live their lives, feels better than facing up to ignorance in our own culture. The risks associated with IVF are also something that isn’t talked about much.

I think everyone should be made aware of stuff like this but we might have to look to our own house as well.

And dont forget that her husband must provide everything for thr household and his money is also hers. But her money is hers alone.

I am concerned about both, its entirely possible

@PuzzledandpissedoffI don’t think the teacher would need to single out particular types of religious marriage. As others have said, there are many faiths whose marriages aren’t automatically legally binding.

The teacher would just need to say that the only religious marriages that were automatically legally binding were CofE ones and that if in the future pupils from other faiths wanted the full protection of marriage they should make sure that their religious marriages was backed up by a separate legal ceremony/registration.

It’s just like agreeing to arbitration for a business/ financial dispute.

You can agree to have a civil dispute settled by any system you like, including Sharia law or another religious system.

But where people go wrong is they thing it’s going to come in as a form of recognised criminal law, or anything to which all parties don’t consent, which a. Won’t happen and b. Would be madness.

For sikh marriages you have to show a legal marriage certificate before you do a religious ceremony as they will refuse you. This can either be done as a civil ceremony or a registrar can attend the temple before the religious ceremony. As most of my circle are Muslims Nikhas are not legally binding. Some make sure there legally registered and some of my friends rely on the local imams to be fair hence "dowry" they pay including gold

The statutory guidance makes it clear that by the end of secondary school, pupils should know “what marriage is, including their legal status e.g. that marriage carries legal rights and protections not available to couples who are cohabiting or who have married, for example, in an unregistered religious ceremony”

I know, @Fifthtimelucky, but in light of past events only a very brave teacher would then go on to point out that "this doesn't apply to such-and-such a religious marriage", and even if they did the kind of families being discussed may very possibly dismiss it as western lies and even remove their child from the school

There doesn’t need to be any extra cost involved. The Hindu/Sikh/Muslim religious leaders need to become licenced to perform weddings like Jewish, Catholic, Anglican Church leaders are. They are effectively licenced as registrars, just like the people go perform civil weddings.

Many Hindu and Sikh women are also in religious only marriages. The problem is that the British government discriminates against people who can’t christian, forcing us to pay extra for registries etc and many people just can’t afford to do that especially when their weddings are paid for by extended family. The government needs to legally recognise ALL religious ceremonies.

When my friend married, the imam said at the Nikah that he would never marry a couple who hadn’t already had a civil wedding. This was in London about 20 years ago.

This is a very fair point, EasternStandard, the more so as Islam really is seen much more as a "code for life" than just something to do on Sunday or whenver

However there are countless muslims who live thoroughly decent lives according to that code, with rights for their women and all the rest of it, but needless to say they're not the ones who attract headlines

I'm the first to criticise those who corrupt what they claim to believe, be it Islam or anything else, but I'm very mindful that it's culture which is responsible rather than the religion itself - and that's coming from someone who doesn't adhere to any of the mainstream ones

It's not really a surprise - Islam is not really set up for the benefit of women.... at all!

Most religions aren't.

I haven’t read the whole thread, but to those saying that this should be taught in schools, it is.

The statutory guidance makes it clear that by the end of secondary school, pupils should know
“what marriage is, including their legal status e.g. that marriage carries legal rights and protections not available to couples who are cohabiting or who have married, for example, in an unregistered religious ceremony.”

I don’t know how long this has been a requirement, so no doubt some women will not know - or will have forgotten.

it’s on p27 of this.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68b96b003f3e5483efdba9b4/Relationships_Education_RSE_and_Health_Education.pdf

Please stop spreading misinformation about Islam. Islam is not the problem. Anti-Islam and Anti-Muslim posts on Mumsnet is becoming more and more common. What is the purpose? Explain it to me like I’m a child how it is for the greater good? There are problems in every community - why is this rhetoric being promoted repeatedly? We are already being targeted in the real world, why are some of you spreading misinformation and making us unsafe?

But yes historically among muslims and other religious groups there has been a history of the religious wedding having no legal position.

Yes, and along with unmarried mumsnetters in relationships they are at a severe disadvantage by not being legally married!

I don’t think you can separate religion out as text. It is the way lives are lived and that includes for women and girls.

Your’re talking about a generation of people in the general population who generally don’t get married as much. Add in if you are religious the only way you can spend 1:1 time alone with someone you have to get married religiously. So you’ll be married. Then you’ll have a wedding possibly a year later. For some people it isn’t important and they won’t want it. What percentage of mumsnetters are in a long term relationship but not married? That would be an interesting stat. But yes historically among muslims and other religious groups there has been a history of the religious wedding having no legal position. I say this as a muslim.

Where does it say that? Quote the Quran where it says that. I cannot find it. Fact check before posting. My first post highlights we have protection from injustice and abuse. Please read posts properly.