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

To: Vigilanteman
Government initially got into the marriage business because it generated license fees, blood testing fees and the like. Most of this came about in the later part of the 19th century.

How many times does that have to be corrected? The marriage license is many, many centuries old about 8 centuries, and was mandatory in Massachusetts since the 1600s for example, Thomas Jefferson bought one for his marriage in Virginia where the law was that it had to be purchased in the county the bride lived in, George Washington paid for the marriage license for his favorite nephew, the federal government was passing legislation on marriage in the 1780s, and 1790s.

Before that, it was churches which recorded marriages and the government simply recognized them. It may not work that way now with all the faux churches performing faux marriages, but it couldn't possibly work any worse than the road we're heading down.

Couldn't work any worse? Mormons, Mosques, cults, gay churches, animal cults, satanic cults, defining legal marriage on their own?

Either marriage is legal, or not, and that has always been so, whether the controlling authority was Greece, or Rome, or tribal, or Islam, or the Catholic church, or English law, or whatever, if you don't care if your marriage complies with law, then don't, you had that option 500 years ago, and a 100 years ago, and you have it today.

Do you really think marriage is forbidden to the non religious in America, and that Mosques and churches will be handling divorce law?

36 posted on 05/19/2014 1:22:09 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Ted Cruz and Mike Lee-both of whom sit on the Senate Judiciary Comm as Ginsberg's importance fades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: ansel12
There has always been a Justice of the Peace type option for the non-religious. You pointed out several examples yourself even if the specific people involved were religious.

There is also a large difference between the government as a party to a marriage contract as in the case of bonds, banns, etc. and the government as the sole legitimate recorder of marriages as we have now. Yeah, I know, churches still perform and record marriages, but they have no legal force other than as back-up evidence to the government records.

This will at least be the case until some judge declares a Muslim marriage to four wives to be a civil right under Sharia law. And it is only a matter of time before it is coming once fudgepacker marriage is declared co-equal.

What legal basis is there to stop now?

48 posted on 05/19/2014 1:46:02 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]

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