Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lawmakers Consider Preventing ALL Marriage In Oklahoma
NEWS ON 6 ^ | 24 JANUARY 2014 | Michael Konopasek

Posted on 01/24/2014 4:44:08 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist

OKLAHOMA CITY - State lawmakers are considering throwing out marriage in Oklahoma.

The idea stems from a bill filed by Rep. Mike Turner (R-Edmond). Turner says it's an attempt to keep same-sex marriage illegal in Oklahoma while satisfying the U.S. Constitution. Critics are calling it a political stunt while supporters say it's what Oklahomans want.

"[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all," Turner said.

Other conservative lawmakers feel the same way, according to Turner.

"Would it be realistic for the State of Oklahoma to say, ‘We're not going to do marriage period,'" asked News 9's Michael Konopasek.

(Excerpt) Read more at newson6.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; US: Oklahoma
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; gopestablishment; homosexualagenda; liberalagenda; marriage; miketurner; nomarriage; oklahoma; rino; ssm
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
Strategery or caving in to the Gaystapo?
1 posted on 01/24/2014 4:44:08 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

My dog IS my dependent. Dog food and vet bills are no longer low cost items. I need a deduction for Income Tax. Marrying my dog may be the only way....


2 posted on 01/24/2014 4:45:50 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Govt has no business being involved with marriage in any way.


3 posted on 01/24/2014 4:47:27 PM PST by kingattax (America needs more real Americans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

What benefits attend to the State recognizing and defining marriage, as well as other relationships that are not marriage? Ideally the State should be an agent to promote prosperity and good order. The State defines a multitude of relationships and commitments. It honors faithfulness, truth, and other virtues the left would like to define or legislate out of existence. There is an inherent interest for the State to distinguish between virtue and vice, using its authority to punish evildoers and reward those who do good - just as it is in a good, solid home with God-fearing children and parents.


4 posted on 01/24/2014 4:50:56 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

This might be a good idea. The state does not marry people, churches do. People could still marry in their church. What’s the advantage of registering it with the state? It isn’t taxes... There is a marriage penalty with taxes.


5 posted on 01/24/2014 4:51:40 PM PST by babygene ( .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Hadn’t considered this angle. Wonder how it would play out.


6 posted on 01/24/2014 4:51:54 PM PST by TheZMan (Buy more ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Badly written article, but amazing that it's actually being considered by a lawmaker. It doesn't mention that marriage would go back to where it was in the first place - the churches.

IMO, it's the only solution, and it's the right solution. The only business the State has in marriage is to recognize its validity under the 1st Amendment - religion alone. But the State should have zero authority in actually validating its existence.

That's why liberals scream over this idea - without the State, what do they have?

7 posted on 01/24/2014 4:53:12 PM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Unless you want a simple legal status that ties a man to his children and their mother.


8 posted on 01/24/2014 4:55:33 PM PST by rwilson99 (Please tell me how the words "shall not perish and have everlasting life" would NOT apply to Mary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

BTW, no matter how much “love and commitment” may be present before, during, or after the act, there is no virtue in depositing one’s own DNA into an excretory orifice. There is most certainly an ill effect and mendacity against the Creator and nature in defining “marriage” as equal to such a practice. The left cannot handle truths of this nature, as it elevates an imagined “inclusiveness” over the exclusiveness of virtue.


9 posted on 01/24/2014 4:57:29 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rwilson99

Unless you want a simple legal status that ties a man to his children and their mother.

Private Marriage contract between two people, they decide to split, they have to go to a regular court like any other contract dispute


10 posted on 01/24/2014 4:59:41 PM PST by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Marriage is between a man and a woman and God so how did the state get in the mix of all of this?


11 posted on 01/24/2014 5:02:07 PM PST by plainshame
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

What about enforcement of laws relating to estates, trusts and wills, etc.?


12 posted on 01/24/2014 5:07:28 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Yes! What a cool idea!


13 posted on 01/24/2014 5:12:50 PM PST by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Yes! What a cool idea!


14 posted on 01/24/2014 5:12:59 PM PST by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Might be a better move to prevent all divorce.


15 posted on 01/24/2014 5:17:45 PM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

I’m all for this...

Because if marriage is what the STATE or FED defines it as, instead of what GOD established it to be, then it means nothing.

This country has rejected God, and thus it’s freedom.

I applaud my state of OK for this


16 posted on 01/24/2014 5:38:55 PM PST by Safrguns (PM me if you like to play Minecraft!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Marriage has always had to be legal, or it didn’t count outside of the people who were rooming with each other.

You can do what ever you want in private, and call it whatever you want, but if you want it to be legal, then it has to be legal.

No one forces people to “marry” according to law.


17 posted on 01/24/2014 5:44:06 PM PST by ansel12 (Ben Bradlee -- JFK told me that "he was all for people's solving their problems by abortion".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Just wondering - Could a church perform marriages that it considered strictly spiritual commitments without the state considering it a LEGAL marriage for tax purposes, property rights, etc.? Such marriages would be registered in church records but not forwarded to the state for official recognition as state-sanctioned, legally-binding marriages.


18 posted on 01/24/2014 5:46:03 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

The reasons the statists scream over this idea is that they wouldn’t have a way to punish and to keep punishing those who they know will never accept whatever impossibility the state is calling marriage at the time.

Freegards


19 posted on 01/24/2014 5:51:24 PM PST by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
"Marriage has always had to be legal, or it didn’t count outside of the people who were rooming with each other."

Why - particularly in this day and age - does marriage need to be "legal"? The state does not say that only married people can live together, or have sex, or have children, so why should there even BE a LEGAL entity called marriage? All of the moral and social reasons for it have been disputed by - and mainly abolished - by liberals. Why shouldn't churches just perform marriages as a sacrament or religious vow, without registering with the state?
20 posted on 01/24/2014 5:52:59 PM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson