Talk:Lieberman clause

Separation of church and state?

This article states that the legality of Liberman Clauses might be questionable given the US Constitution's Establishment Clause (enshrining the separation of church and state). I'm wondering how this could be. I'm not an expert on ketubot or anything, but if the Liberman Clause requires that the divorcing couple see a rabbinic court, how does that run afoul with the Establishment Clause? Is the rabbinic court an arm of the state or federal courts in the country? Has any legislature vested power in them? If the answer to both of these questions is no, I'm confused as to how this could be a potential issue and for accuracy's sake, the incorrect portion should be deleted.Ronnotronald 18:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibility: The contract, which is otherwise presumably enforceable under various US Jurisdictions, forces the parties to the contract to engage each other in a religious court. If one of the parties fails to do so, they may turn to the State or Federal judicial entity to seek damages under the contract. The judge in such a situation is then in a position where he/she'll have to say "go to this religious court or suffer the consequences in this contract." I don't know anything about constitutional law or church/state separation, but this may be the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.173.93.69 (talk) 22:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox Participation

I took out the sentence "All at the meeting, including the highly respected Orthodox rabbi, Joseph B. Soloveitchik, were said to have agreed that it was halakhically valid, and would be used," because I can't find any original sources substantiating this. If someone finds a source, he or she can feel free to put it back in with a citation.

Who's Lieberman

Could someone add a bit clarifying who Lieberman was? The article never provides any information about him or her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rkstafford (talk • contribs) 22:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]