# Polygamy versus other forms of relationships. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 10, 2003, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150 "2003-12-10T15:14:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/41 "2003-12-11T12:37:58Z")
I’m with IWLN on this one… just the fact that women having many husbands is frowned upon and the opposite isn’t rings as wrong to me. ``` Then there is the issue that the first wife may have gotten married thinking she would be the only one.... or the first husband thinking he would be the only one. Suddenly your husband/wife wants another person in his/her life as well as you. How does one legally coordinate this ? Can the 1st, 2nd spouse stop a new marriage from taking place ? In the end Polygamy will only be an excuse for wealthy men to bring in more women into his house using his money to attract them. Its a social model that was necessary in socieites with high death rates among males... women will have more to lose in polygamic rules then men.... ``` ---
**Author:** ![IWLN](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b5ac83/32.png) [@IWLN](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IWLN)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/42 "2003-12-11T13:22:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Aldebaran \* > So I said actually that I have no idea how this would work out in practice. > If you feel that there is something wrong in the upbringing of women that makes them vulnerable for what is called here “exploitation”, then that is not my fault, is it? > And may I add to this that both men and women are strongly influenced by this so called “gender role” and are expected to conform to these rules? Such is the case in every society I know of. No I didn’t bring up exploitation and although I’m sure it can occur, I don’t think that is the normal situation. What I’m saying is that if you’re raised to think something is normal, if it is how it’s always been; then you have no problem with it. The way my mother raised me and her attitudes toward my father had a major impact on how I approached marriage. If my father would have had two wives, I would have expected something similar to that. > [@](#): > > I’m sorry, but you come across as someone who sees marriage as “getting possession” of someone. No. That one makes _me_ smile. I deeply value and honor him. He’s too stubborn for me to _own_. I could not share him anymore than you could share your wives with another man. > [@](#): > > It depends on how you organise such a relationship. > If everything is looked at, talked through and agreed on before you undertake such an step - and I think you largely underestimate and are largely uninformed about what it demands - there is little room for developping such dilemmas. Doesn’t it initially hurt the first wife’s feelings when you tell her you want a second wife? To me that would translate to my husband saying I wasn’t enough. I mean no disrepect. It’s just even with everyone agreeing it seems like there would be some hurt? > [@](#): > > Thank you. I’ve always seen myself as being born as a boy and I always had the impression that I developped rather normal (brain functioning aside). I am truly happy for you and even happier for your wives.😉 > [@](#): > > For as far as I’m informed about mormonism, a man can even marry both mother and daughter and her sisters, a concept and idea which I find repulsive and incomprehensible. > There are in mormonism also other concepts and idea’s regarding women and marriage I would never be able to agree with. > If I’m wrong about this and there are mormons posting here, please correct me on this and give additional information. I only have a small amount of second hand knowledge on this, but from what I understood, very young girls were told it was their duty and given no choices. I don’t believe there are very many groups practicing poligamy now or if they are, it is very secret, since it violates our laws. > [@](#): > > You talk about “fait of polygamy” which sounds like : Women must undergo such arrangements without having anything to say about it. > Maybe it is the situation in the cases you observed. But you shouldn’t generalise it like you did. I’m sorry. In my country, we really have no true concept of poligamy other than past history and much of that was negative. So it is agreed on before you marry that you may take another wife if you wish? Or is it just understood because it is so common. Is it common? If I’ve asked you anything I shouldn’t have I apologize and you can tell me it’s none of my business.🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/43 "2003-12-11T13:46:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Rashak Mani \* > I’m with IWLN on this one… just the fact that women having many husbands is frowned upon and the opposite isn’t rings as wrong to me. You have a valid point with this. Of course in Islamic societies you would hear the defense that there is nothing said in Al Qur’an about multiple marriage for women while its commands describes very explicitely the regulations counting for men. My argument against this is that what isn’t described can’t also be declared invalid or prohibited. Of course that is always a good point to come up with if you are looking for overheated debate. It was one of my favourites when I was very young and very innocent… 🙂 > [@](#): > > Then there is the issue that the first wife may have gotten married thinking she would be the only one… or the first husband thinking he would be the only one. Suddenly your husband/wife wants another person in his/her life as well as you. How does one legally coordinate this ? Can the 1st, 2nd spouse stop a new marriage from taking place ? That are points that should be regulated by law. > [@](#): > > In the end Polygamy will only be an excuse for wealthy men to bring in more women into his house using his money to attract them. mmmmm… I must reflect on that one… Although I prefer of course the idea of women fighting for me because of my unique shining personality and charm. > [@](#): > > Its a social model that was necessary in socieites with high death rates among males… women will have more to lose in polygamic rules then men… This are some of the reasons polygamy is even mentioned in for example Al Qur’an. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/44 "2003-12-11T13:58:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by IWLN \* > What I’m saying is that if you’re raised to think something is normal, if it is how it’s always been; then you have no problem with it. The way my mother raised me and her attitudes toward my father had a major impact on how I approached marriage. If my father would have had two wives, I would have expected something similar to that. So what is then your argument against such a situation? > [@](#): > > Doesn’t it initially hurt the first wife’s feelings when you tell her you want a second wife? To me that would translate to my husband saying I wasn’t enough. I mean no disrepect. It’s just even with everyone agreeing it seems like there would be some hurt? There are an abundance of situations where this happens and especially in cases as Rashak Mani came to mention. There are also a lot of situations where it doesn’t. For example in many rural societies where women come under such a workpressure that a second wife is welcomed as a very much needed help in the household, on the land, with the children. > [@](#): > > So it is agreed on before you marry that you may take another wife if you wish? A woman can stipulate in the marriage contract that whenever her husband chooses to marry a second wife she gets immediately a divorce without further discussion. > [@](#): > > Is it common? It depends of the country and even more on the personal situation of those involved. Polygamy is not common in my family or in my circle of friends. If I’ve asked you anything I shouldn’t have I apologize and you can tell me it’s none of my business.🆒 \*\* [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/45 "2003-12-11T14:02:51Z")
Sorry, I’m using a keyboard I’m not used to attack, so once again I touched the wrong button. About your last remark: Upto now I saw no reason to find your questions intrusive. I exposed myself a bit to such mild interrogations, no? Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Sappho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@Sappho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sappho)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/46 "2003-12-11T14:41:57Z")
It seems to me that a few issues have become entangled with the one of whether or not we should be able to marry more than one person. Firstly, exploitation of women. Assuming the marriage consent age wasn’t changed, there seems no reason to suppose that underage girls would be forced into marriage. Secondly, legal considerations. Yes, it would be complicated, no question about it. But if people want to embroil themselves in such complications, then surely it’s up to them? Thirdly, that of whether or not two men would be able to get married to one woman. On the third point, all I’ll say is that, speaking as a polyamourous woman, all non-monogomous relationships are complicated. I’ve had two boyfriends at a time, two girlfriends at a time, and one of each, and it’s always been difficult at times. But, if you can make it work, why not make it legal? I really don’t think that in the Western world at least we would necessarily see vastly more two wife/one husband marriages than two husband/one wife marriages. Often, I think you would see two bisexual wives with a husband. Polyamoury has been, in general, pretty liberating for both men and women and I don’t see why being able to legalise it would make it any less so. ---
**Author:** ![IWLN](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b5ac83/32.png) [@IWLN](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IWLN)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/47 "2003-12-11T14:57:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Aldebaran \* > So what is then your argument against such a situation? I don’t really have one. My only point was that it would generally not work here. Of course neither does marriage to one person work particularly well here, with 50% divorce rate. > [@](#): > > There are also a lot of situations where it doesn’t. > For example in many rural societies where women come under such a workpressure that a second wife is welcomed as a very much needed help in the household, on the land, with the children. I can understand that. Over here we tend to think first about the sexual side and not about the practical things. I honestly was thinking about hurt feelings. > [@](#): > > A woman can stipulate in the marriage contract that whenever her husband chooses to marry a second wife she gets immediately a divorce without further discussion. That’s fair, although I don’t normally believe in solving problems with divorce. She should have the option. > [@](#): > > About your last remark: > Upto now I saw no reason to find your questions intrusive. > I exposed myself a bit to such mild interrogations, no? Yes, you’ve been very nice. Thank you. ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/48 "2003-12-11T15:33:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Aldebaran \* > \*\*So this concept of “joined property” is the accepted common rule? > As I said… I wouldn’t dare to get married according the US laws 🙂 > > As for your further explanation, I have a question about that: > > Suppose you get married while both having nothing more then what you describe. > Later on one of the partners starts a business with a capital inherited from his/her family. The business florishes, money comes in in abundance. > Then something happens between the partners with a divorce as result. > Are you now claiming that everything must be divided, including the business started on the initiative of one of the partners and where the other one didn’t need to take any financial risks (=didn’t add to its starting capital) and didn’t work for? > Isn’t it possible to make/change a mariage contract after you were married to settle such things? > > Salaam. A \*\* Yes, the “what’s yours is mine and what’s mine is yours” thing is pretty much standard. Of course, there are some who subscribe to the theory that “what’s yours is mine, and what’s mine is mine” but that’s a whole other issue, really. And for what it’s worth, I wouldn’t dream of getting married under the traditions you describe, so I guess we’re even. 🙂 Generally speaking, if you start a business during the marriage, it’s considered a marital asset. If the business fails, the spouse is going to suffer the financial consequences of that failure, so it’s only fair that the spouse reap the financial rewards if the business succeeds. Besides, most businesses lose money for a while when they first start up; if your spouse is the only one bringing in money during this time or you’re both living off savings, that’s considered a real contribution to the start-up, as is emotional support. The same goes for one spouse starting a new career, or going to medical or law school during the marriage. If it’s accrued during the legal partnership (marriage), it belongs to both partners. When divorce rates started going up, there were apparently a lot of cases where men had gotten married during college, gone to med school while his wife supported him both financially and emotionally, and after 20 years decided to trade her in for a younger model. The men were arguing that they’d been the ones building up the money-making careers, so they were entitled to keep the money they’d earned. The courts essentially said, “Sorry, chuckles, we’re not falling for that one. Write the lady a check.” I think inheiritances are often special cases, but that varies by state. That’s the thing about discussing legalities in the US; every state is it’s own jurisdiction and has its own set of marriage and divorce laws. ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/49 "2003-12-11T15:35:50Z")
Oh, and it also goes for the bad stuff in a marriage. If one partner runs up a lot of debt during the marriage, it’s considered a shared debt. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/50 "2003-12-11T17:00:46Z")
And while we’re at it, **Alde** , you wouldn’t believe the proportion of Americans (or heck, Westerners in general) of both genders to whom the very idea of a Prenuptial (or Pre-Nuptial) Agreement stating division of property is considered an insult to the core of their very souls! (look up the term in threads from the last year and you’ll find one in which even I got into a fight!) Now, in complex modern societies, it helps if there’s a “default” in the law for those cases where the individuals did not make preparations. Thus if you die w/o leaving a will, the Law states the order of your kin’s access to your estate. If you do not enter into a PNA before marriage, in most countries using the British Common Law system or the Napoleonic/Roman Civil law system (meaning thus all the Americas, much of Europe, and a lot of the former colonies worldwide) your marriage papers place you automatically under whatever is the Law On Marriage and the Family of the jurisdiction you live in. Which tend towards being biased towards the “traditional” marriage, under Community Property and all that. (And really, this was not arbitrary. As Western societies developed, they had their own historic reasons to establish that as the preferred system for transferring property from generation to generation and stabilizing inter-family relations. That this may be obsolete is not something we can just decide upon instantly.) So you may have a point in that if Polymarriage is established in the West, it may be the case that a PreNup would have to be absolutely mandatory. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/51 "2003-12-11T17:30:06Z")
JR, I know all about regulations such as you describe which are also present in for example Belgian Law. The rule there is: If no other legal contract is made it means that your marriage falls under the common property setting. But if I recall well (courses on Belgian Law lies 13 years back in my school curriculum) one can decide to change the marriage contract any time during the marriage. The lack of interest in the USA in making a legal contract that stipulates other terms surprizes me. And in my opinion is should be mandatory in any case everywhere. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/52 "2003-12-11T17:45:26Z")
Why? What’s the benefit of dividing up the children before you’ve conceived them, the money before you’ve made it, and the property before you’ve even considered buying it? Nobody knows what the future will bring, and every big life change would involve another trip to the frigging lawyer to update to contract. Unless you go into it with something to protect, why go to all the bother and expense of planning an escape hatch you have no intention of using? ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/53 "2003-12-11T17:59:43Z")
CCL Exactly. Nobody knows the future. So to secure some of it in this easy way it is the best thing one can do. And why should it be necessary to “update” if you have written out everything in detail the first time? Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Stonebow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ed8c4c/32.png) [@Stonebow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stonebow)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/54 "2003-12-11T18:27:57Z")
A lot of the marriage contract issue has to do with differing views on what marriage is supposed to be. In most modern Western cultures, it is tied with romantic love and devotion, not simply a family contract. My wife and I don’t have a pre-nup. I love her, and she loves me…and the idea of divorcing her leaves me feeling ill. She fulfills a need in my life that transcends any physical needs, and frankly, if she were to leave, the state of my assets would be the least of my worries. The same holds true for her. Silly? maybe. Naive? Sure. But would I rather it be different? Nope. So maybe where we’re missing each other is in our definitions and expectation of marriage itself. ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/55 "2003-12-11T19:00:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Stonebow \* > So maybe where we’re missing each other is in our definitions and expectation of marriage itself. I’m absolutely certain that all my relatives from mother’s side who all are pure blood “Westerners” with all the expectations of marriage you describe, have a marriage contract. I think it is more a question of being familiar with this or not. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/56 "2003-12-11T19:48:43Z")
Well it appears to almost be a requirement of [Belgium law](http://www.diplomatie.be/en/services/notarydetail.asp?TEXTID=4735) > [@](#): > > Belgian case law starts from the principle that in the case of a marriage between two Belgians, Belgian patrimonial marriage law is applicable if they do not draw up a contract. In the case of a mixed marriage, it is not always obvious which law is applicable. In the latter case, a contract is certainly useful. > > Belgian diplomatic and consular officials are, however, not competent to draw up a marriage contract other than for two Belgians, or for a Belgian man marrying a foreign woman. Though I find it interesting that Belgium consular officers are _not_ competent to draw up a contract between a Belgium woman and a foreign man. So in Belgium you do not need a contract as there is blanket legal coverage _unless_ the spouse to be is not a national. In Canada a pre-nuptial would basically cover the following: > [@](#): > > Ontario Family Law Act > Section 52 - Marriage Contracts > (1) A man and a woman who are married to each other or intend to marry may enter into an agreement in which they agree on their respective rights and obligations under the marriage or on separation, on the annulment or dissolution of the marriage or on death, including, > (a) ownership in or division of property; > (b) support obligations; > © the right to direct the education and moral training of their children, but not the right to custody of or access to their children; and > (d) any other matter in the settlement of their affairs. Honestly to my mind part of it seems covered by actually speaking with my wife and the other seems to be covered in my will. Besides I entered my marriage expecting a pooling of resources and obligations. Now should I have entered into my marriage with umpteen dollars vs. my wife’s meager possessions I suppose a pre-nuptial might be in order, but between normal people, why would you bother? ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/57 "2003-12-11T20:21:34Z")
Grey, Consular offices are situated outside the Belgian territory. I have no clue why only a marriage between a Belgian man and a foreign woman is mentioned, I would need to look at the original text instead of a translation. And a contract other then what is provided by the legal settings is certainly something I would recommend, also between two Belgians, any time any place. Salaam. A ---
**Author:** ![Aldebaran](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Aldebaran](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aldebaran)\ **Post date:** [December 11, 2003, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150/58 "2003-12-11T20:29:49Z")
The text stipulating that either bride or groom must be Belgian to be able to be married on a consular post. > [@](#): > > 1. Marriage certificates > > A marriage may be celebrated in a Belgian diplomatic or consular authority only if either the bride or the groom is Belgian and lives within the area for which the said authority is competent. Prior to 1 January 2000, both bride and groom had in principle to be Belgian, but now mixed marriages are also possible. > > To this end, the two of you, or one of you, must make a declaration of marriage. This declaration replaces the publication of the banns. The registrar will draw up this declaration. If one or both of you is registered on the population registers, the aliens’ register or the waiting register, or if you have an effective residence in Belgium, the registrar of that municipality will receive a copy of the deed. The latter will check that there are no impediments to the marriage, and will notify it within ten days of receipt of the notification to our diplomatic or consular authority. > > When the declaration of marriage is made, you must both present the following documents to the Registrar: > > a literal copy of the birth certificate; > > proof of identity; > > proof of nationality; > > proof that you are not already married or, as appropriate, proof of the dissolution or annulment of any previous marriages; > > proof of registration on the population registers, the aliens’ register or the waiting register and/or proof of your current residence; > > possibly, written proof from the future spouse who is absent when the marriage declaration is made, to the effect that he/she consents to the declaration. The signature of an absent future spouse must be legalised; > > any other authentic document showing that the person concerned satisfies the conditions required by the law to be able to marry. This document will often be an affidavit of law, in other words a document setting out the provisions of the foreign law and allowing the Registrar to check that the alien satisfies the conditions laid down by his/her national law in order to marry. > > Documents from certain countries must be legalised by the competent authorities in the country of origin. > > Nevertheless, in the case of a certain number of countries, the documents must not be legalised but bear the apostil affixed by the competent authorities in the country of origin. All documents drawn up in a foreign language must be translated by a sworn translator into French, Dutch or German. > > Refusal to draw up the deed of declaration of marriage > > It is most advisable, before undertaking the steps necessary to obtain these documents, to contact the officer who will celebrate the marriage. If you fail to file all the documents necessary, or if certain documents are not legalised, the officer will refuse to draw up the deed. He will notify you promptly of his decision, and give the reasons. If one of you is registered in Belgium he will likewise send a notification to the registrar in that municipality. Within one month of the notification, you may appeal against this decision before the court of first instance in your place of residence or the court in Brussels. The marriage cannot be celebrated before the 14th day following the drawing up of the deed of declaration of marriage. This marriage must be celebrated within 6 months from the expiry of this 14-day period. Once this period of 6 months elapses, it would be necessary, in principle, to make a fresh declaration of marriage. > > In order to be able to marry, you must both report in person to the registrar, in the presence of two witnesses. You may have to present an attestation from a notary certifying that you have concluded a marriage contract. This attestation must quote the date of the contract and the marriage settlement chosen. > > Refusal to celebrate the marriage > > The registrar may refuse to celebrate the marriage where it emerges that the qualities and conditions laid down for contracting a marriage have not been satisfied, or if he is of the opinion that the celebration is contrary to public order. He will notify you promptly of his decision, and give the reasons. You have one month to appeal against this decision before the court of first instance. > > In the event of doubt, he may postpone the celebration of the marriage, possibly after he has secured the opinion of the Public Prosecutor, for a period of two months at the most from the wedding date chosen by you, in order to proceed with supplementary investigations. If he has taken no definitive decision within that period of two months, you may get married, even if the period of six months has elapsed. > > Marriages of convenience > > A new article (Art. 146bis) has been inserted into the Civil Code stipulating that a marriage is null and void where, even though the formal consents have been given with a view to the latter, a combination of circumstances show that the intention of at least one of the spouses is clearly not the creation of a lasting shared life together, but simply the obtaining of an advantage in terms of residence linked to married status. Salaam. A [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polygamy-versus-other-forms-of-relationships/218150.md?page=2)