I think that the court made the right decision. The man is a Muslim, and according to his religious tradition he was to marry a virgin. Sure, people can be let down, or disappointed after marriage, but this is different. For example, a woman may not have wanted to marry someone who snores, but the judge isn't going to grant a divorce to the poor woman who has a sleepless honeymoon thanks to her noisily breathing partner of choice.

The question of virginity, however was a prerequisite to the marriage and the man would not have married the woman if she had answered truthfully. So I understand why the woman lied, but the man should not be forced to maintain his side of the contract when the woman did not keep up her's.

So this is why "hymen reconstruction" surgery is an actuality and not a myth.

So interesting!!!
How can they really 'prove' this on their wedding night? I know of some situations where the woman's hymen may have been broken due to other things (like horseback riding or something) what if she really was a virgin but it just did not appear that way? i dont know..

But wait, I just thought of something. The French get really antsy when religious practice enters in any sort of civic domain, ie the headscarf in a classroom. Because the school is public, because France is secular, there should be no religion.

I mean it's different than us in America, but it makes sense.

In France, they are so adamant about this separation of religion and state and the need to keep religion OUT of state, they require a civic marriage ceremony. So if you WANT to have a religious marriage you have to go to the church and then head on down to the town hall as well.

So considering this, I would understand why the French would not want what was a civil marriage to be granted a divorce because of religious reasons.

Do you think that the fact that it was a civic and not a religious ceremony, and the fact that in France they make a big distinction (religious ceremonies are not valid under the French law) changes the validity of the court ruling?

I've read in books, literature mind you, about women, even virgins, bringing a hidden knife with them to bed. Then they cut their finger to make absolutely sure that there is a drip of blood on the sheets.

It sounds like the judge did ignore France's position on separating religious and secular - at least based on the explanation here. Let him annul the marriage at the mosque. big baby.

I don't know why intelligent women of any religion or culture go along with this nonsense. We know that other things can affect whether one appears to be a virgin or not - I'm sure that if you got a bunch of Moslem women together talking, you'd find out all kinds of ways to get around the boys. It's arrogant freaking nonsense to be so wrapped up in the notion of a woman's 'purity'.

marni, I was thinking the same things!

yeah, I was thinking the same thing. There's no way to prove it. Some women aren't even born with a hymen

Maybe she admitted to him that she was not a virgin after they were married. I doubt the judge would annul a marriage without proof.

Just becasue she didn't bleed doesn't mean she isn't a virgin, she could have lost her virginity to a Super absorbancy Tampon at 13, unless she told him otherwise...

I don't see what the problem is if the man is requesting a divorce. I wouldn't want to be married to a liar/manipulator that consciously misrepresented themselves either, so why tell him he has to be.

Yes, the next question is did she admit to not being a virgin or is this a debate on technicality. If I were her I'd be happy to be rid of him and his narrow minded a$$. Let him go find a hymen in one piece so he can be happy.

I just read a comment on Jezebel (looking for more info) that says published reports in France say the bride lied and admitted it was a lie once the groom accused her.. so that's different: a lie undoes a secular contract, just not being a virgin undoes a religious contract.
It's still crap.

I don't think that it is narrow minded. It is part of his faith, and she LIED. I think that is much more then just him being narrow minded.

I think it's a ridiculous criteria for marriage. But, this jerk doesn't and if that was understood, then clearly she materially misrepresented herself. Therefore, I think the court is right to grant the annulment. Here we just call it "fraud" and grant annulments for it and I don't think it really matters what the basis of the fraud is, does it...? Kenny Chesney/Renee Zellweger never even disclosed the basis, did they...?

I don't think the secularists have a real gripe here.

I know someone who married a Muslim and lied to him about being a virgin. I don't know how you could lie to someone about something they hold in very high regard.

Apparently it would have been a lousy marriage anyway: he didn't love her enough to overlook the whole not a virgin thing and she didn't love him enough to tell him the truth.

Well I agree a lie is a lie is a lie, but just like the Catholic faith the Muslim faith needs to start moving with the times if it wants a healthy following.

My co-worker was just telling me of her Catholic parish in Chicago that has had to strip away its conservative views in order to serve its particular community. Her friend is walking to the alter at 7-months pregnant; unheard of in other perishes but not theirs. It's also gay friendly Catholic Parish.

There is nothing that says you can't marry a someone who is not a virgin in the Catholic faith. And maybe in her community they have never had a pregnant woman walk down the isle, but I have had a few friends walk down the isle in a Catholic church pregnant And as I have said before, I have never gone to a church that has not been gay friendly. No one ever has asked if anyone was gay. Not to say others have never had another experience, just stating mine. The last church in Los Angeles I attended had a sign out front encouraging the homosexuals to come in on Sunday, I can't remember what it says.

Muslims have a very large following and it is growing. I don't feel that the religions need to change for the people. I say live of the lord, not of the world, and would personally rather be part of a shrinking religion with devout followers then people who want a religion to change for them.

Being a person of faith is not easy, and I don't think it was meant to be.

Hypno, why are you and I always discussing religious views? What is up with that?

I'm going to have to agree with cine_lover (we go WAAAY back, LOL).

I also have many single friends that had their children baptized.

I'm with you, Stephley. I think the gal is better off without him.

Yes we do Tiabia. Back to the good old Pop days.

Uhm the topic aren't we talking about the Muslem faith?

As for my point Major religion have, are and are going to continue to have to move with the times. They can not survivie without followers period. My example of the Catholic church needing to change it's conservative views over the decades is an example of how religions have done that.

I only brought up Catholics because you did.

And many Muslims don't like the "moving with the times" aspect of their religion, hence a lot of the problems going on today with fundamentalists.

I wasn't picking on Catholics again cine I was complimenting them, you can put your stones away now.

I wouldn't throw stones at you hypno. I save my stone throwing skills for two men, and two men only.

On this site, a compliment for a Catholic is so few, if ever, I get confused when there is one

Didn't Pamela Anderson get her latest marriage (or one of them anyway!) annulled based on FRAUD? Wouldn't this be the same thing, all religious discussion aside? Look, the guy, for whatever reason, believed that virginity was a necessity for a marriage. If the girl knew that and then lied, didn't she commit fraud? Seems to be a legal basis for dissolving a marriage...

I wouldn't want broken merchandise either.

ahem... the whole point of this is that there is a court ruling on a religious issue. muslim, catholic, hindu, whatever you want to choose - this is a religious issue and not a legal issue. i totally agree with the french people who are up in arms about this. and Msucre: perhaps you are mistaking the desire of some people in our country to blend religion and law, but this would NOT fly in america either - when you get married here you still need a legal document that states you are married. the church does not issue your new social security number, nor does it handle the tax issues. her rights as a woman aside, and the ridiculousness of expecting a woman to "prove" she's a virgin aside, this is NOT an issue for the courts to decide. yikes. what the heck is this world coming to?

They are probably both better off without each other but the sad thing is that now this woman is probably going to be ostracized from her muslim community. She will probably be branded as a slut and will have a difficult time finding a husband of the same faith in France if her name is in the papers. I don't know too much about the Islamic faith but being married is an important part of a woman's value to them.

Sigh...I kind of want to move to France. Oh and how I wish there was an eiffel tower emoticon! :eiffel:

Sorry kind of off-topic. Ummm....back on topic: hymen or no hymen he sounds like a jerk!

to hypnoticmix and everyone else, I wanted to point out that as a muslim, its not a prerequisite to be a virgin. yes, premarital sex isnt allowed, but if it did occur, it isnt any reason to marry/not marry the person. that was probably the mans choice in this story that he wanted to marry a virgin.

That makes the question of why the judge agreed with him confusing again Pharm... If the guy had wanted to marry a great cook and she claimed she was a great cook, then after the wedding admitted she wasn't, would the judge grant him a divorced based on a lie invalidating the contract?

its hard for me to have an opinion on this because there are too many questions. If it were a non muslim couple, would the judge of ruled the same? did he rule based on the religion or based on the fact that she lied? and finally, if it were a non muslim couple would this even be news?

*** IMPORTANT CORRECTION HERE***

What really happened is that the bride told the groom she wasn't a virgin after the wedding, and the marriage was annulled on the base of her lying (i.e. FRAUD), not on the base of her not being a virgin. The judge declared that it wasn't his place to decide what was important to a groom, and that if that lie was cause for him to declare fraud, then fraud it is. It's very very important to make that distinction because the judge ABSOLUTELY didn't annul the marriage because of the virginity or lack thereof. It's just that French people tend to make big hooplas of everything, so of course this affair brought on a huge controversy, and the case was twisted by the media to make it about the religious/muslim thing instead of her simply... lying to her future husband!

PS: BOTH the bride and groom asked for the annulment.

That's exactly how I saw this situation when I first read it: Lying. Plain and simple. I'm not religious, but if I married a man under one important presumption, and he confessed he lied, I might reevaluate my relationship. If I loved him enough, I might ignore it, but some principles can't be budged. I don't want to be stuck with a liar for the rest of my marriage, and neither did this man.

I don't think the woman was subjected to anything, and especially after reading karlotta's comment, I don't think any wrongdoing has been committed by the court.

Hypno, the point of a religion is not to have a healthy following. A religion is not to please people, but to please God. You can't "bend rules" or modernize them if you think they are divine truths.

Marriage is about forgiveness. It says for better or for worse for a reason. Forgiveness is the only thing that allows for that...

Proving you are a virgin on the wedding night being a religious requirement is something new to me. I'm a Muslim and trust me I can tell you that this is a cultural thing and not religious requirement point, blank, period. I wonder when the time is going to come once people can differentiate between requirements that are religious and things that are cultural.

How do we know she isn't lying about having not been a virgin? Maybe her husband was horrible in bed, or had anger issues, and so she wanted out and lied that she wasn't a virgin so he'd want an annulment.

I love France If I had the means I would move there in a heartbeat.

That is very interesting pharm_chic. So is the article flat out wrong on that suggestion? Well if that is the case than the issue is did she know this was his prerequisite and lie to him or not. This we will never know so now I guess why argue the point anymore. O.K. bye.

MSucre: I never said the point of religion was to please people. I said religion needs a healthy following to survive. It is a fact that major religions Catholicism being a prime example has ever so slowly shed strict rules over the decades and they did so not for $hits and giggles but to maintain their flock. Mind you also these are just church rules that they have let go. They are not changing scripture and doctrine.

That would come under the fraud section of an annulment. If she lied about anything and "tricked" him into marrying her than he has no reason to stay married to her. The lie is the problem not the virginity.