This is nuts. Presumably atheists or members of religions not recognised by the Israel government cannot marry at all without going abroad?
This is even more nuts, and also completely untrue. The UK has had civil marriage as an option since 1837, where you get married in a registry office. That’s what me and my husband did, and what my parents did back in the 70s. Nowadays you can get married in a fancy hotel or stately home, but it has to be a building registered for the purpose - a bouncy castle would not qualify.
okay thanks for correcting me. I remember jokes from years ago about how Brits had to get married in a church. I sure got whooshed! I feel like a fool.
But your reaction to the main subject of my post:
is also true…and yes, it’s nuts. Israeli law recognizes established religious figures as the only legal officiants who can marry people. So, yes, lots of folks get around the law by going abroad.
But this has always been true, and has nothing to do with the Palestinian conflict.
What would happen if the mayor of Tel Aviv attempted to officiate a wedding? It would not be legally recognized? But in, I don’t know, France, where clerics are lucky they didn’t all get murdered during the Revolution and only the state can marry people, that would be respectively recognized in Israel?
I have heard that, while it’s not Iran, good luck trying to get married in Israel if you are gay. Or even if you aren’t but some “established” (lol) religious figures don’t like your face for some other reason.
Israel recognizes full gay rights, but calls them “civil unions”., essentially the same as marriage, but with a different name.
The actual wedding ceremony is done overseas, using those same travel agencies I mentioned above.
Being gay in Israel is similar to what American law calls a “protected class”, so all discrimination is illegal.
So “recognize religious marriages”. I’m not trying to make a point here, I’m just curious how far the rules go. Does a recognized marriage apply to any Rabbi (or presumably, Imam, priest, etc.) or for Jews does it require the approval of someone who is recognized by the rabbincal authorities? I recall something about the authority council that decides who qualifies for the right of return being a council of fairly hard-line Rabbis.
Or is a Rabbi or Imam or Priest absolutely forbidden from officiating in a mixed marriage as part of the religious qualifications of the cleric? (I seem to recall that the qualifications to be a cleric or officiant in North America seem to be pretty open…)
My only quibble would be that there were some level of atrocities and village clearances on both sides during the 1948 war.
There’s an interesting documentary Tantura about the scholar who documented the incidents at a Palestinian village north of Haifa and the backlash against what he wrote.
Sorry. I was wondering if it was actually true in some other country and you just got the place wrong, but it seems kind of unlikely.
Yeah. Israel deserves a lot of blame for how they are treating Palestinians, in the West Bank in particular. Some of what they do is necessary for security reasons, but by no means all. Especially this:
Does it really matter what the written law is if, in practice on the ground, authorities use questions about religion to enforce it? I mean, if it’s true that legally, Israeli Arabs could go wherever they want, and Palestinians (non-citizens of Israel) cannot, but in practice, Israeli Arabs are often stopped at checkpoints based on religion (or appearance, etc.), then that practice would seem to be as relevant, or more so, as the written law, with regards to what people face on the ground.
But it seems, AFAICT, that Coates’ statements in the OP are factually accurate.
[Moderating]
And as an FQ moderator, I’m ruling that whatever factual content this thread ever had has been resolved, and leaving it closed. If you want to discuss any of the other issues, do so in a different forum.