Posted on 06/27/2015 12:09:54 PM PDT by EveningStar
Mississippi is considering pulling the plug on issuing marriage licenses altogether after the Supreme Court struck down bans on gay marriage Friday morning.
As the state's governor and lieutenant governor condemned the court's decision, state House Judiciary Chairman Andy Gipson began studying ways to prevent gay marriage in Mississippi. Governor Phil Bryant said he would do all he can "to protect and defend the religious freedoms of Mississippi." To Bryant's point of doing "all" the state could do, Gipson, who is a Baptist minister, suggested removing marriage licenses entirely.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
Here’s an idea: Regulate gay marriage like other states regulate the right to keep and bear arms.
Institute:
Waiting periods.
Mandatory training and permitting.
Random inspections by authorities.
Mandatory liability insurance.
Mandatory health screenings and blood testing for diseases (a la Califonia’s ‘product testing’ for firearms).
Onerous security requirements (’safe storage or arsenal requirements’).
Maximum sex quotas - a la magazine capacity limits.
And many many more.
Top it all off with refusal to honor gay marriage licenses from other states unless they honor that state’s CHL like the person was at home. This is long established precedent that states do NOT have to honor other states’ licenses, the one that allows MA and CA to tell tourists to leave their protection at home.
Make it a ‘Full Faith And Credit’ clause issue. This might actually lock up the judicial system with the paradox. Make the Left have to choose between promoting gay rights and suppressing gun rights.
there is alink at that sight to florida doing something similar
http://www.newsweek.com/florida-county-courts-go-rogue-refuse-marry-anyone-avoid-same-sex-weddings-296300
Indeed. Wait until the corporate types who push this stuff start asking on their job applications what church you attend.
No actually, the court did that How do you like it? No good can come from any of this. The Gay crowd might not end up liking that.
civil disobedience has it’s costs
I mean that the American people said, through various deeds: this is my wife, I want her to inherit my property when I die, I want her to be able to make my healthcare decision if I am incapacitated by illness or accident, and if we suddenly decide we hate each others guts I want mediation, and I want it all done with as little upfront paperwork as possible, and I want the government to assure it. This is what caused legal marriage to happen.
It’s a licensing matter because that’s the paperwork that makes all the above happen. When you and somebody else file that piece of paper you’re telling the government that you want access to all the assurances above.
I didn’t say they have to do it in the name of revenue. I said they’re gonna lose a lot of cash, and gain nothing. The fact is they’re still going to get stuck RECOGNIZING marriages when it comes to inheritance and HIPAA and all that. They’re still going to get stuck DISSOLVING marriages with all the judges and buildings and paperwork that implies. They’re just not going to make any money on the front end.
Sure the ceremonies COULD take place in Mississippi without government help. But most won’t. Since people are going to have to go to another state to get the paperwork most folks will say “heck let’s do the ceremony there too”.
just like some concealed carry laws
Then what is the path?
Short of building a conservative electorate that restores sanity to marriage law at the federal level, what is the path?
I guarantee there are creative legal solutions at the state level that will preserve legal marriage while bypassing the fedgov BS. Where there’s a will, there’s always a way. Maybe not exactly what Mississippi is doing, but I’ll bet there’s a workaround without being beholden to the federal SCOTUS ruling.
That is true, we can’t slip out of this battle.
I don’t know how we win, but this is the battle that we are stuck with, and escapism and fantasies isn’t going to make it go away.
Nobody cares if we go home and hold our breath, and refuse to play.
The state’s recognition of marriage has destroyed it, beginning long before yesterday.
If the state drops marriage licenses, the churches can take control of marriage again.
Meanwhile, other laws can be enacted to protect the rights of the churches.
state and churches can rebrand the product under a different name.
There is a definite tax advantage to filing a federal joint tax return when only one spouse is working or when one spouse earns quite a bit more than the other. It's one of the benefits a couple gets when the wife stays home with the children.
I think they will issue state man-woman habitation licenses or holy matrimony licenses and grandfather the old marriages. until its dejavu(sp) all over again
Since the federal government now holds sway over marriage, let the federal government license marriage. Make it an department of the federal courthouse.
Churches just conduct ceremonies which bless the marriage, but nothing they do legalizes the marriage as far as the state and federal government are concerned. Churches address purely the religious, Biblical aspect of the marriage.
You didn’t need a church ceremony to be legally married prior to this ruling and you shouldn’t need one now.
Yes, straight people need to be reminded that mentally ill pervs took their sacred ceremony away from them. It will remind them to be extra sweet to homo fascists from now on.
Why not first adopt a policy that before a couple can be licensed, the “wife” must attend several weeks of classes, held once a week, on carrying a baby, child-birth & child nursing. No exceptions, because, after all, the Supreme Court of the United States has demanded that all be treated equally.
Marriage is not a religious institution. It is a natural human activity, codified by the state into an implicit contract. The state has delegated authority over the ceremony to religious institutions, but keeps control over the conditions for marriage, its recognition and registration. The state has no escape in this matter.
However, no state or federal government has the right to force a religious institution to perform a ceremony for people who the religious institution doesn’t approve of. You can be sure, however, that they will try.
“Simple answer: File a notice in the local paper and have it recorded. Works for handling the affairs of the deceased, why not the living?”
Many tax laws specifically refer to spouse.
I had to in the Army if I wanted her to be recognized as my wife, and as far as I know, there are times in life, especially upon a death, when the proof of legal marriage is asked required.
Would you destroy all records and evidence of your marriage right now?
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.