Gandhi's famous first campaign in South Africa resulted from the asinine idea of the authorities to only recognize Anglican ministered marriages, effectively declaring any other invalid and the children thereof as illegitimate. Muslims in particular were not happy.
Reminds me of US religious Right's ideas to make church attendance and religious education in their narrow interpretation of Christianity mandatory for everyone, in particular non-Christians while claiming that no one's freedom was infringed by that since everyone was free to leave the country.
Or the idea of Austrian ethno-nationalists to require yearly public consumption of national dishes (that by pure chance included pork).
Not in front of the emperor's statue though, afaik.
For some "cultures", meddling in and infringing on other cultures is a core tenet.
Btw, the traditional pork ban in Judaism and Islam was simply common sense, as were several other food-related taboos
24 hours ago
Until the Council of Trent cohabitation did a legal marriage make (marriage by consent). Even the private consent (He: "you are my wife" She: "Yes"), the matrimonium clandestinum, was valid as far as the Church was concerned. The Council changed that and required the priest and the witnesses. Protestants did not follow necessarily (Luther thought the fathers had veto power). State and Church depending on location insist to this day on either mutual non-recognition or one requires one to precede the other. And let's not even go to what is or was considered a divorce even limited to European cultures.
Gandhi's famous first campaign in South Africa resulted from the asinine idea of the authorities to only recognize Anglican ministered marriages, effectively declaring any other invalid and the children thereof as illegitimate. Muslims in particular were not happy.
Reminds me of US religious Right's ideas to make church attendance and religious education in their narrow interpretation of Christianity mandatory for everyone, in particular non-Christians while claiming that no one's freedom was infringed by that since everyone was free to leave the country.
Or the idea of Austrian ethno-nationalists to require yearly public consumption of national dishes (that by pure chance included pork).
Not in front of the emperor's statue though, afaik.
For some "cultures", meddling in and infringing on other cultures is a core tenet.
Btw, the traditional pork ban in Judaism and Islam was simply common sense, as were several other food-related taboos
Until the Council of Trent cohabitation did a legal marriage make (marriage by consent). Even the private consent (He: "you are my wife" She: "Yes"), the matrimonium clandestinum, was valid as far as the Church was concerned. The Council changed that and required the priest and the witnesses. Protestants did not follow necessarily (Luther thought the fathers had veto power). State and Church depending on location insist to this day on either mutual non-recognition or one requires one to precede the other. And let's not even go to what is or was considered a divorce even limited to European cultures.