Unchaining women, Bill would facilitate religious divorce;
http://www.washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&ArticleID=6635&TM=54976.86
[excerpt]
Friday, February 02, 2007
Unchaining women
Bill would facilitate religious divorce; some worry about constitutionality
by Eric Fingerhut
Staff Writer
Supporters of Maryland legislation that would require a Jewish man to give
his wife a Jewish divorce before he could receive a civil divorce say they
are confident their bill is constitutional and optimistic about its
passage. But some in the Jewish community wonder whether the bill may
breach the wall between church and state.
Known as a "get law," using the Hebrew word for divorce, the legislation
would require the parties to the divorce to sign an affidavit, "under
penalty of perjury," that they have taken "all steps ... to remove all
religious barriers to remarriage by the other party."
The bill comes in response to the increasing visibility of the plight of
agunot, or chained women. For a couple to divorce under Jewish law, a man
must grant a get to a woman. Without it, a woman may not remarry in a
religious ceremony.
The bill is backed by the Maryland Jewish Alliance, the coalition that
lobbies on behalf of the Washington and Baltimore federations and community
relations councils.
The alliance's David Conn, who also is the Baltimore Jewish Council deputy
director, said the legislation would "complement what the community is
doing" to help agunot.
While the bill may "intersect with religion," he said, it "would not
excessively entangle" the two.
"If we viewed this bill as a breach [of the wall between church and state],
we'd never support it," said Conn. "Given the legal analysis and the
terrible ... problem, we're strongly in support."
[end exceerpt]
***************************************************************
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
HRSepCnS · Historical Reality SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
USAF LT. COL (Ret) Buffman (Glen P. Goffin) wrote
"You pilot always into an unknown future;
facts are your only clue. Get the facts!"
That philosophy 'snipit' helped to get me, and my crew, through a good
many combat missions and far too many scary, inflight, emergencies.
It has also played a significant role in helping me to expose the
plethora of radical Christian propaganda and lies that we find at
almost every media turn.
*****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
