It may puzzle you, but it is a fact that 99% Hindu marriages run the course. A little salt in your soup, a man in west runs to court hollering: Cruelity, murder. She is out to kill me with BP, so save me. But not in India, pal. Cruelity is a ground for divorce, sure. But acts of cruelity have to be shown to be continous, systematic and calculated and REAL as well. A few weeeks ago court refused to take cognizance of a husband's cruelity. He was deadly against his wife keeping late hours, taking too much alcohol, not taking her out daily, and her propensity of giving away expensive gifts. Court granted a decree of dissolution due irrevokable breakdown caused by the wife, but not cruelity. There is a difference there. What special studies you need to establish that in India, divorce rates are very low? There cannot be a single reason, but a whole basket of them. Of course, family and social pressures too play a part. Remarriage of a divorcee is more difficult than of a widowed person. First question: Why was there a divorce in the first place? What if the marriage was not consumated for months, maybe due to impotence? Your problem is that you think that whatever prevails in your culture MUST happen everywhere.
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, bare act: http://www.netlawman.co.in/acts/hindu-marriage-act-1955.php But Act alone is not sufficient. There are High and Supreme Court orders and directions and judgements, which are not found in the Act. Take 13 (1) (1b). Deals with cruelity. The SC has defined it, in various judgements, enlarging the scope. Is an adulterous relation a cruelty? NO, it is an independent ground. But bringing your partner of adultery home, known to your spouse as your paramour, thus demeaning him/her is cruelty. [From my limited knowledge of law]. PS In some countries there is a [Wiki] : No-fault divorce Under a no-fault divorce system, the dissolution of a marriage does not require an allegation or proof of fault of either party. A divorce for the HECK of it, so to say. Not so in India. Divorce by Mutual Consent is possible, but at least a fig leaf of reason has to be given.
Do the facts follow suit? It is easier for Hindus and Muslims to divorce than it is for Christians. So by your adage, there should be greater divorce in the former - it would seem however that the highest rates of divorce are in countries where Christianity used to predominate. I think making something taboo makes it more attractive. But yes, family and social pressures as well as support do make things easier or more difficult. However, it is my observation that the couples attitude towards marriage is more relevant than anything else.
Marraiges can be arranged, however the girl's permission must be asked whether she agrees or not. This recording is seen with Abraham's son Isaac - although both sets of parents agreed, Rebecca was asked and her answer decided. This brings the issue of child marraiges as wrong, because the child would not be capable of deciding. Germany last week joined the civilized world and made enforced marraiges as illegal.
Does the guy's opinion not matter? I didn't mean child marriages or forcing anyone to wed. Only people who wish to get married and just haven't met a suitable partner yet. If this described you, then would you prefer to find your own spouse or would you mind if your parents/family/friends (anyone close to you) did the searching for you?
It wasn't my PC. The page was not available at the time I first accessed it. It is available now. You just have to think the worst about me, don't you?
Actually, perhaps the "ease" of divorce pertains to the general tendency of Indian (civil) law to be as efficient and requiring as little bureocracy as possible. So we would have to compare how easy or how difficult, in comparison to Western standards, it is in India to buy and sell land, real-estate, cars and other motorized vehicles, large domestic animals, what the laws and regulations are regarding the building, owning and maintaining of infrastructure etc. I am quite sure that at least traditionally, these things were much easier (ie. requiring less bureocracy) in India than they are in the West. Look at the literacy rates: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! A situation like this suggests that civil laws must be easy to implement in countries where literacy is lower.
Perhaps this also has to do with how Christians view the world and life as a whole, in comparison to Muslims and Hindus. I'd say that the traditional Christian outlook is the most simplistic one of the three, so it doesn't surprise that Christians have much more of an all-or-nothing, once-and-forever-or-never-at-all attitude.
Divorce practical for India. FIRST off, chuck out all the notions that westren norms SHOULD be applied to Orient too. Period. Muslim marriage in India can be dissolved in three ways" 1. Husband utters TALAQ thrice. 2. Wife seeks divorce, aka KHULA. 3. Judicial dissolution. Though rarely invoked, it is possible. Hindu marriage can be dissolved only by a judicial process. Same for xians. But even the courts are not quick to grant a divorce. A six month period is mandatory. It helps to cool the passions and makes reconciliation possible. That period is enough to withdraw 90% of petitions. Hey, even Hindu divorced couples are known to remarry each other!!
Umm that would be a resounding NO. Bureaucracy, thy name is Britain. We have been under the Raj of the babu brigade for the last 200 years. The reference to the ease of divorce was religious. Hindu divorces and Muslim divorces in India are easier than Christian divorces, we don't have a common civil code.
