Archive for the ‘marriage’ tag
from The Hindu
Bangladesh’s parliament has passed a landmark bill aimed at protecting the rights of the Hindu community members, especially women from marriage-related cheating.
The new law — the Hindu Marriage Registration Bill 2012 — aims to provide legal and social protection to members of the Hindu community.
State Minister for Law, Justice and parliamentary Affairs Qamrul Islam moved the bill that was passed by voice vote, bdnews24.com reported.
He said the law was being formulated since there was no such law in the country to register the marriages of Hindus.
by Deaglan de Breadun
from The Irish Times
The government is expected to agree today to back legislation giving humanists the same status as organised religions and civil registrars in conducting marriage ceremonies.
Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton is due to ask her ministerial colleagues to support the Civil Registration (Amendment) Bill at this morning’s Cabinet meeting.
The legislation was introduced in the Seanad as a Private Members’ Bill by Trinity College Senator Ivana Bacik and is due to pass final stages in the Upper House tomorrow.
The Bill proposes to amend the Civil Registration Act 2004, which regulates the registration of civil marriages.
The 2004 Act stipulates that, apart from Health Service Executive registrars, only a member of a “religious body” may celebrate legal marriages.
This is defined as “an organised group of people, members of which meet regularly for common religious worship”.
This includes organisations such as the Pagan Federation Ireland and the Spiritualist Union of Ireland, which have obtained registration under the Act.
But the definition excludes members of the Humanist Association of Ireland, who currently conduct humanist wedding ceremonies even though these are not legally recognised.
The Bill proposes to extend the right to conduct civil marriages to nonreligious groups such as the HAI. A group of this nature must be a “philosophical and nonconfessional body”, have been performing marriage ceremonies for at least five years, and at least 20 couples must have participated in the ceremony.
By Helyn Trickey from CNN
When Kavi and David Moltz tied the knot in summer 2010, the multicultural couple — she’s Hindu and he’s culturally Jewish — tried to honor both their traditions.
“I had to ride in on a horse … a giant Clydesdale adorned in Indian raiments,” recalls David of the Hindu wedding tradition. “But we gave a nod to my culture, too,” he says.
In Hindu culture, friends and musicians playing traditional Indian music accompany the groom’s ride to the ceremony. Instead, David had his friends play drums, and he wore a traditional yarmulke and tallith (prayer shawl) that had been his father’s and grandfather’s, as captured in photos by Justin & Mary.
The evening before, during the Mehndi party in which the bride and members of her party are adorned with henna designs (an impermanent skin ink) on their hands and feet, David wore a traditional Indian suit.
“(Kavi’s parents) wanted me to wear a turban, too, but I’m a tall skinny white guy, and I thought that would look funny on me,” he says with a laugh.
“The ceremony should ideally be all about you, but truthfully it is so important to the families and the parents, too. You have to be flexible and … be on the same page with your wife or husband. (Wedding details) are some of the first things you have to pick and choose your battles about,” he says. “If (a detail) is really important to the families, then go with the flow,” he advises.
Today, more and more intercultural and interfaith couples are getting married. Finding meaningful ways to bring two (or more) very different cultures and religions together in one ceremony can be difficult…
From The Washington Post
Traditionally the various faiths of the world have been suspicious of each other, so it’s not really a surprise that interfaith marriages have high divorce rates. Just because you love someone doesn’t mean that you don’t harbor distrust at some level, in a secret compartment of the heart. If your family has conditioned you to believe that yours is the only true faith, a second element is added. Who wants to sacrifice part of themselves to please another person? When parents advise their children not to marry outside the faith, they aren’t passing on wisdom; more likely they are reminding their children not to stray from us-versus-them thinking.
The more productive topic is how to avoid such divorces. To do that, a young couple must find common ground in spiritual matters. This is happening already to some extent. The ties of dogma and orthodoxy have been weakening for decades. Yet there is something deep that needs to be solved: the paradox of faith. I would venture that faith itself can put strains on a marriage (I’m not working from pure instinct here: statistics show that the Bible Belt, where church attendance is highest, also enjoys the country’s highest divorce rate whereas the Northeast, which is much less religious — and also more educated, an important factor — enjoys the lowest). Faith becomes negative when it binds the mind into set, inflexible beliefs.
Sadly, this is the only type of faith that most religious people know, the type that prevents them from thinking about God or the soul on their own. The paradox, in simplest terms, is that having been told the right answers, people of faith feel less motivated to undertake their own spiritual journey. They aren’t troubled enough by doubt or be spurred by curiosity. Their chief dilemma is lapsed faith; they feel guilty for being less strict than generations which came before. (This is a generalization, of course; some spiritual journeys do begin on a strong basis of faith.) A faith composed of right answers sounds appealing, but marriages are about negotiation. That’s the bottom line, and when your spouse asks you to negotiate about religion, a small voice in the back of your mind is likely to guilt trip you. Religious practice feels literally like sacred ground.
Yet one person’s sacred ground is another person’s high horse. Couples must mutually decide to abandon the secret sureness of being right. This can’t be a tug of war. Nor can it be the sort of passive giving in that years later turns into active resentment. Faith is about conscience, so every step needs to be taken with a clear conscience. As love matures in a marriage, a shared spirituality becomes easier, because in your spouse you see aspects of the divine: love, trust, hope, and comfort. These serve as the basis for a practical kind of faith; God has acquired a human face. I suspect that when couples split on religious grounds — or at least cite religion in a long list of complaints — the real problem is that love didn’t mature. The issues brought into the union have continued to fester, generally out of sight.