Muslim wives legally invisible

Your final statement… if you skip the civil marriage you aren’t married in the eyes of the state… just brings us back to where we are right now, doesn’t it?
And I may be wrong, but if a Muslim man/couple only care about the religious wedding ( a bit like the catholic example given by a PP), they still won’t bother? I can’t imagine the bride or her family insisting upon it?

typo

Not at all shocked as I already knew. I would say it is common knowledge. (I’m not a Muslim.)

It isn’t completely true about Christian marriages being automatically legal. A Catholic wedding needs a registrar - the priest may also be one but not necessarily. This is different to say CoE where all priests / vicars are authorised.

Agree more education is needed. But more education is needed generally about marriage. “Marriage is just a piece of paper” is really not true when the shit hits the fan.

If you decided to have an oddball ceremony, at least you’d know you weren’t legally married. My original point was that such a huge proportion of Muslim women have a Nikah only marriage and think they are legally married.

If you decided to have an oddball ceremony, at least you’d know you weren’t legally married. My original point was that such a huge proportion of Muslim women have a Nikah only marriage and think they are legally married.

The simple answer is that in most countries, the state doesn’t really give people an option. A religious wedding on its own just isn’t recognised, so if a couple want their marriage to count in law, they have to do the civil bit. That’s how people are pushed into registering without it feeling like they are being forced personally.
In France, Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium, the only legal marriage is the one at the town hall. Imams and priests can still do religious ceremonies, but only AFTER the civil one, and they can be fined or prosecuted if they perform a wedding first. In the Nordic countries, some imams are licensed as registrars. If they aren’t, then the nikah has no effect and couples go to the registrar anyway, because otherwise they aren’t legally married.
In Muslim-majority countries like Morocco or Tunisia, a nikah is only valid if it is registered with the state court. Imams are part of that official process, so they can’t marry people outside it. In some Gulf states, you even need a medical or genetic certificate before the state will issue the marriage contract.
So it isn’t about dragging people to the registrar against their will. It’s about setting up the law so that if you skip the civil marriage, you simply aren’t married at all in the eyes of the state. Since most couples want the rights and protections of marriage, nearly everyone complies.

The simple answer is that in most countries, the state doesn’t really give people an option. A religious wedding on its own just isn’t recognised, so if a couple want their marriage to count in law, they have to do the civil bit. That’s how people are pushed into registering without it feeling like they are being forced personally.
In France, Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium, the only legal marriage is the one at the town hall. Imams and priests can still do religious ceremonies, but only AFTER the civil one, and they can be fined or prosecuted if they perform a wedding first. In the Nordic countries, some imams are licensed as registrars. If they aren’t, then the nikah has no effect and couples go to the registrar anyway, because otherwise they aren’t legally married.
In Muslim-majority countries like Morocco or Tunisia, a nikah is only valid if it is registered with the state court. Imams are part of that official process, so they can’t marry people outside it. In some Gulf states, you even need a medical or genetic certificate before the state will issue the marriage contract.
So it isn’t about dragging people to the registrar against their will. It’s about setting up the law so that if you skip the civil marriage, you simply aren’t married at all in the eyes of the state. Since most couples want the rights and protections of marriage, nearly everyone complies.

If you decided to have an oddball ceremony, at least you’d know you weren’t legally married. My original point was that such a huge proportion of Muslim women have a Nikah only marriage and think they are legally married.

On fave value yes. But 3.9 million Muslims verses 0.3 million Jews.

Muslims make up 6% of the UK population yet eat 20% of the fresh meat consumed in the UK. Added in that halal meat is often served in hospitals, schools and restaurants so some non stun halal is being consumed by non-musilms.

Unfortunately you can't look at 1 fact or percentage in isolation if you want to gain the full picture.

To be honest personally I dont like non-stun kill. I've seen both, and stood on the kill line for both. But I also don't like to see facts mis-represented, or 1 culture demonised when neither, in this case, has the moral high ground over animal welfare at point of kill.

I don’t know where your research has come from but the question that smacks me in the face is how do those other nations force Muslims to go through a civil marriage if they don’t wish to?

88% vs 0%.

Perhaps this should be in the feminism chat, but I’ve just found out something shocking: 60% of British Muslim women are in Nikah only marriages.

Nikah is a religious marriage ceremony. Unlike Jewish or Christian marriages, there is no automatic civil registration.

This means that under British law a Muslim woman with a Nikah marriage is in fact not married at all. If the relationship ends (through separation, divorce, or death), she has: no right to spousal maintenance, no claim to property or pensions, no inheritance rights and no access to the protections of the UK Family Court.

This has been raised in parliament. This has been raised by judges. The 2018 government review found that many Muslim women believed their Nikah marriage had legal standing.

Anything done about it? Nope.

I wondered if this is covered in schools. There is a statutory relationships and sex education guidance that the DfE published which schools must follow. It does require teaching about marriage, but NOTHING in the statutory wording prompts schools to explain the difference between a religious-only ceremony and a civilly recognised marriage.

So, many/most of you might be thinking, ‘So what? It’s none of our business to interfere with others’ religious or cultural practices! Surely it’s the same situation in other countries?’

Nope. The following countries ensure, through legislation, that Islamic marriage ceremonies happen after or alongside civil registration:

France, Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Italy, Finland, Sweden….basically all the European countries….except Britain.

Anyway, anyone else shocked?

I may have misconstrued Sharia Law. I’ can’t link but have screenshot BBC upcoming programme which might be informative.
I still think many Muslim women are poorly treated in domestic affairs but am open to other opinions/knowledge.

“Sharia Law is recognised for domestic issues. This includes marriage and divorce”

What does that mean? Recognised by whom for what purpose?

I never said that all halal are non-stun i said that is was a mix as confirmed by your link. Your orgianl post said all was stun.

The only non-stun kill legal in the UK is for religious reasons, it is an exemption Under the legal requriement for animals to be stunned before slaughter. Part of the reason for the exemption is the concerns over religious groups setting up 'underground' abattoirs, something which would be far worsening animal welfare and potentially but

This isn't the thread for this really but kosher slaughter makes up such a small number that fewer non-stun kosher kills happen than non-stun halal.

On the consumer side- if given a choice the vast majority of Muslims would choose non-stun halal over stun halal if given a choice, hence why it isn't labelled on the packet if stun or non-stun.

Personally I would say going the way of NZ would be best where all has to be stunned but they run special education days to help religious leaders understand the stun doesnt kill the animal and therefore is allowable under the religious rules. The key supporting people gain knowledge, coming bsck to the thread, i guess similar to the marriages, supporting people in gaining knowledge.

The UK government doesn't have a legal requirement to ensure all animals are stunned before slaughter.

Around 88% of animals slaughtered in the UK for Halal are stunned first.
All animals slaughtered under the Shechita (for Kosher) are non-stunned.

https://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/farm/slaughter/religiousslaughter