Wednesday, April 10, 2013


The Palm Beach Post, while writing about the anti-sharia bill that's passed a reading in Florida, has tried to use a mind-boggling approach to opposing it, citing the Jewish community's supposed opposition, while at the same time making an offensive claim about Jewish law:
Critics, including the Florida Bar, the Anti-Defamation League, the ACLU of Florida and the National Council of Jewish Women, contend the bill would have a negative impact on Jewish divorces, called “gets,” and could trouble the state’s relationship with Israel. Under Jewish law, only a man can grant a divorce to a woman.

That violates Florida and federal constitutional protections, David Barkey, religious freedom counsel for the Florida Anti-Defamation League told the panel. And it would bar courts from recognizing any divorce settlements granted under Israeli or Jewish law, he said.
Now just a minute. As far as I know, "gets" require both sides to agree. It may have once been the case that only a hubby could divorce, but that was modified several centuries ago. Even if Jewish law did still go by such an absurd direction though, does that mean I agree? Absolutely not, and there are many wives in disastrous marriages today who'd agree. Does the ADL actually want to adhere to an antiquated belief? Because there's plenty of "chained" women in modern Israeli society who'd rather such a law not be used to govern their status.

This would not have an adverse effect on relations with Israel at all, and that's why I strongly encourage the Florida senate to go ahead with passing the law, and any Jewish women in America who want a divorce that doesn't rely on poorly structures laws certainly shouldn't have to be required to put up with such things. Likewise, no Muslim woman should have to contend with a one-sided divorce procedure, especially if they're trapped in a violent, abusive relationship with a Muslim man. That's why the bill is being drafted, and I sure wouldn't defend Jewish law at all costs while other innocent lives are at stake.

1 comment:

Jacob Alperin-Sheriff said...

It's not enough that y'all are willing to endanger the legality of shechita and popularity of hashgacha (among non-Jews) as long as it hurts the Muslims too, but you're willing to endanger kiddushin and gittin too?