An apple condom – flickr/Chrisinplymouth
Like us surely did not escape you : the Catholic Family Associations assign the site Gleeden, “the first dating site dedicated to married people”, to appear before the Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris, so that it decides on the legality “to thus publicly promote infidelity within the framework of marriage”.
What is Marriage?
In question, the famous article 212 of the civil code, which stipulates that “the spouses owe each other mutual respect, fidelity, help, assistance. We could discuss the meaning of the word fidelity, because you can very well be faithful in friendship and have several friends, but fidelity in the couple is understood in a constant way in the jurisprudence as “sexual exclusivity”.
The terms of the legal marriage contract are therefore explicit: even if adultery is no longer systematically considered a fault by the judges in the context of a divorce, the bride and groom are still required to have sexual relations only with their husband.
Where does this come from? Romanticism? Love marriage? Nay. Marriage was established as a Catholic sacrament in 1215, and transposed into the civil code in 1792. It was then that it became a legal contract between 2 spouses, but it had already allowed for several centuries to legitimize filiations and therefore to attribute inheritance to children born of the marriage. Indeed, since the Miami Experts did not exist, one could not rely on a DNA paternity test to determine whether or not a child was indeed the son of his father. Thus, all children born of marriage were considered fathered by the husband, and sexual exclusivity within marriage was the instrument of this control.
French law has not changed
Thus, French law retained this notion of exclusivity, even when the law on marriage for all was drawn up while sexual exclusivity within a gay couple obviously does not have this usefulness. It would no doubt have gone too far for the religious, who would no doubt have found that we were doing too much damage to the idea they have of a family.
From a legal point of view, the AFC are right: Gleeden puts the finger where our law hurts. If you are married, you have signed a sexual exclusivity contract with your other half, and Gleeden encourages you to break your contract. If you wanted to remain free of a non-exclusive sexual commitment, you had to be in a civil partnership, concubinate, but not marry.
The moral of the story
French law therefore remains a transposition of Catholic morality, and as long as we do not change article 212, this will be the case with marriage. You can hear the AFC lawyer explain, in the France Inter program below, that this approach has “nothing moral”. However, it is the Catholic associations that are attacking sex that goes beyond the law, whether it is a question of closing a sex shop or here of enforcing the law on sexual exclusivity. And who are keen to ensure that French law remains in line with religious morality.
We would love to say thanks to the writer of this article for this remarkable content
Catholics in their Righteous Attack Gleeden
You can find our social media profiles as well as the other related pageshttps://catherinecoaches.com/related-pages/