Get the State Out of Marriage

Townhall.com ^ | January 27, 2014 | Mark Baisley

[rockrr]

There are denominations that will marry non religious people. Of course they are nominally Christian - but who am I to judge?

[RKBA Democrat]

“Marriage predated the Catholic denomination, and they aren’t going to become the state church and control our lives, anytime soon.”

I’ve never advocated that. If you wish to make yourself a member of a church and observe it’s policies, then that is your choice.

[yadent]

A question. Is it sin in the eyes of God to be ‘married’ in the realm of the church without the legality of the state or is ‘state’ approval necessary for ‘righteousness’? Just a question....

[WorkingClassFilth]

I’m coming to that conclusion, too. What purpose - today - does it serve to give them any sort of control over private affairs? If I can marry six men, a cat and a Vitamix blender, then the system exists only for revenue and control. Perhaps moral people should consider alternatives like homeschool families have done for schooling. If I can live with a woman and have marital benefits without loss of monetary rewards in a two-income home, what the heck? I didn’t make my vows before some fool in government.

[ansel12]

Your religion or lack of it has nothing to do with being legally married in America.

Here is law from North Carolina “” After the American Revolution, couples could choose a clergyman or a Justice of the Peace to solemnize their marriage. The laws of 1778 provided that, in addition to the Anglican clergy, “all regular ministers of the Gospel of every Denomination,” as well as Justices of the Peace were “empowered to celebrate Matrimony””

[ansel12]

If you don’t care if your marriage is legal, then do whatever you want.

You have always been able to have your own “marriage” you don’t need it to be recognized by law if you want to avoid that.

[ansel12]

Since the feds have so much dealing with marriage, in the military, federal employment and immigration etc., do you want them accepting homosexual marriage?

[trisham]

? I don't know what you're talking about. Do you have a problem with my question? If so, what is your problem?

Good grief.

[ansel12]

Gays want to “Marry”? Let em but, only under the rubric and authority only feeble minded bureaucrats can conjur up.

Which means they are married and fully legal, in other words, you just came out for gay marriage.

[ansel12]

No, I was just wondering if you would get a straight answer from him.

[trisham]

Ok.

[ansel12]

Actually you do not need a license to get legally married in America, that is a myth.

If you don’t like law being involved in your getting married, then do your own marriage, if it isn’t legal, then the law won’t recognize it and you can have what your are calling for.

[Fester Chugabrew]

The form of government established by our forefathers cannot be sustained without a virtuous citizenry. They need not be Christian.

[Vendome]

I came out for removing ourselves from “State Definition” in my life.

[Nowhere Man]

Since the feds have so much dealing with marriage, in the military, federal employment and immigration etc., do you want them accepting homosexual marriage?

They should not be involved at all, marriage is up to the church, temple, mosque, etc., and/or the people themselves. Perhaps we need a drive to get rid of all recognition of marriage by the Feds and tax everyone individually with a flat tax. Even so, it is not a strong issues with me, we have much bigger issues to worry about.

[Fester Chugabrew]

Its way past time to begin punishing welfare queens and rewarding Mom and Dad and the Family.

BUMP

[Orangedog]

You inveted fedgov into a religious institution that you claim to hold sacred for your 30 pieces of silver in the form of tax breaks and special probate treatment and now you boo hoo when fedgov attaches favors you don’t like. Yeah... go ahead and hate on me for having the temerity to point out the bleeding obvious. Being for big government has it’s consequences. This should be a teachable moment for you all, but instead you’re going to do the stupid thing and think that government power can be restrained by giving the government more power. Fools.

[old and tired]

I wonder what the Founders would say to that capitulation if they were standing in front of you today?!

What are you talking about? Back in their day, marriage was a function of churches and common law in most states. In most cases, it didn't receive state recognition until later. And it's only with income taxes and social security that the legal status between two consenting adults even mattered to the federal government.

[ansel12]

You came our for gays being legally married, this phony call for an America that doesn’t have marriage and divorce laws is a silly way of sidetracking conservative political action.

[ansel12]

What are you talking about? Back in their day, marriage was a function of churches and common law in most states. In most cases, it didn't receive state recognition until later. And it's only with income taxes and social security that the legal status between two consenting adults even mattered to the federal government.

Read the thread, you aren't even in the ballpark.