The Philly Lady Looking to Marry Without a GET
The Philly lady looking to remarry without a GET has been so advised by her rabbinical adviser that she does not need a GET. Now, why does every woman in the world who is married and needs a divorce need a GET, and why does the Philly lady not need a GET? Well nobody has openly stated that they permit it. But she is still looking for somebody to marry, without her GET. And nobody has protested, other than this blog.
If this woman doesn’t need a GET it must be that the marriage doesn’t exist. But she was married. She had a child with the husband. What happened to the marriage? Those who permit her to remarry without a GET must hold that the marriage vanished. That could happen if the husband married her and then it was discovered that the marriage was conditional and the condition was not fulfilled. But in this marriage, there were no conditions.
Furthermore, when somebody makes conditions to their marriage, and the conditions are not met, the marriage can vanish retroactively, but this holds true only if all that was done was Kiddushin. But once the couple marry fully and are together, even if one makes a condition and it is not kept, there is a serious problem whether or not the marriage is valid. See Even Hoezer 38:35 and 36. It seems that people make kiddushin with conditions and they want them fulfilled. If the conditions are not fulfilled the marriage vanishes. But after Kiddushin when they are together already in marriage through Chupa or biah they negate the conditions. Thus, even if we assume that there were conditions that were not met in the marriage of the Philly lady, once she had a child she surely negated the conditions and is married and needs a GET. This holds true whether or not there was kiddushin and then a chupa, and certainly if there was marital intimacy [and certainly if there was a child because most Jewish women don’t want children to be born from zenuse]. Once they are together with chupa or biah, they are mochel conditions so that the being together will not be bias zenuse.
But for some strange reason this lady is considered different than all of this, and she is judged as one who does want bias zenuse. How did her rabbinical adviser know that? Or maybe her “rabbinical adviser” never saw the Shulchan Aruch EH 38:35 and 36 where it is stated, “All of this [that conditions destroy the marriage] is only valid until the two are together [chupah or biah] but if they are together she is certain married, because we assume that when they were together in chupah she negated the conditions. Therefore, she is married and he has to give her a kesuboh.”
Now, if this couple not only married but had a child, even if there was a proper condition and the condition was not met, there is a serious issue whether the marriage vanishes. Because “nobody makes his marriage into zenuse.” If the woman claims that she is free, she is claiming that she lived with her husband and had a child from him with znuse, something that is strongly frowned against, and that runs against the feelings of good Jewish people. Whether such a condition survives intimacy and surely having a child is a serious question. We might want to go into that serious question another time. But for now, let us keep it simple. The wife claims that her marriage vanished. If it vanished, she had a child with no marriage. The child is born out of wedlock, and she had a child out of wedlock. If she is happy with that status, is the child happy with it? When the child comes of age and the child looks for a shidduch, will someone want a child born out of wedlock, from zenuse? This now becomes an issue for Beth Din, because “Beth Din is the father of orphans.” Children whose parents claim falsely that they were born out of wedlock invite the censure of Beth Din.
Well, we will supply a complaint to hasten the process. We will stand up for the honor of the child, who is a pure child, born from a pure marriage, from a mother who is being advised by some nut of a “rabbi” that she is not married. And that nut job obviously does not care about the child. Maybe the child is not paying him, or maybe… But we will state which is obvious to any rabbi who is not a nut job. This woman is married. If she remarries she is sinning with not zenuse but niyufe mamosh. If she has a child it is a mamzer. And yes, just as Beth Din, or responsible people if there is no Beth Din, have a moral duty to speak out to help a helpless child, so do you and I have an obligation to publicize to the world that if this woman remarries, her new children will be mamzerim. And the child she had with her real husband is completely kosher. If her “rabbi” has it reversed, it is probably because his “daas Torah” is in reverse. But we will speak up for the two children. The one born already is a pure child from a pure marriage. And the one who cholila vichass will be born from this lady who claims that she is not married now, her child or children will be mamzerim. Not doubtful mamzerim, but definite mamzerim.
Philly lady. Give my regards to your “rabbi.” You will be hearing more from me. But I don’t blame you. I blame him. The K people in Philly are behind all of this. And I won’t stop mentioning it. Now, let me talk to you.
Your husband wants to give you a GET. But you have to settle with him, not loads of money, not loads of burdensome things but improved visitation from the daughter who left Washington to live in Philadelphia. Even though you played pretty rough with him for years, he is not looking for revenge. I am in touch with him and anyone from your side who wants to settle things, contact me at 845-578-1917. And know this: If you have a child without a GET, the child will be hearing from me. And it will never stop. Maybe whoever told you how to behave will call up the people sitting in jail now who tried to beat up your husband, but failed. Maybe they will beat me up and shut my mouth. Maybe.