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

Skip to comments.

Alabama House Committee Passes Bill Eliminating Government Marriage Licensing
Tenth Amendment Center ^ | 21 April 2016

Posted on 04/27/2016 7:45:24 PM PDT by Lorianne

On Wednesday, an important House committee passed a bill that would abolish marriage licenses in Alabama and effectively nullify both sides of the contentious debate on same-sex marriage. If passed into law, the bill would essentially remove the state from the business of marriage.

Sen. Greg Albritton (R-Bay Minette) introduced Senate Bill 143 (SB143) in February, where it was passed by a 23-3 vote last month.. The legislation would abolish all requirements to obtain a marriage license in Alabama. Instead, probate judges would simply record civil contracts of marriage between two individuals based on signed affidavits.

“All requirements to obtain a marriage license by the State of Alabama are hereby abolished and repealed. The requirement of a ceremony of marriage to solemnized the marriage is abolished.”

Under the proposed law, a judge of probate would have no authority to reject any recording of a marriage, so long as the affidavits, forms, and data are provided. In practice, the state’s role in marriage would be limited to recording marriages that have already occurred. As noted in the official bill synopsis, “This bill would eliminate the requirement of marriage licenses.”

Yesterday, the House House Judiciary Committee passed SB143 with some amendments, which inside sources say will help it get to the Governor’s desk.

“Licenses are used as a way to stop people from doing things,” said Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. “My personal relationship should not be subject to government permission.”

(Excerpt) Read more at blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com ...


TOPICS: Government; US: Alabama
KEYWORDS: alabama; homosexualagenda; license; marriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 next last
To: OneVike
Great idea. The government never should have been involved anyway. They only did so they could turn it into a revenue source.

Read the article again. The government is NOT getting out of it. They're just rearranging the furniture.

21 posted on 04/27/2016 9:25:03 PM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Alabama surrenders.

Yes. This suits the marriage saboteurs just fine.

22 posted on 04/27/2016 9:26:10 PM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

Get the Feds out of most things and let the states decide for themselves like it is supposed to be. States are sovereign too. It’s supposed to be The United States of America, not Federal Governance Subsuming State Sovereignty.


23 posted on 04/27/2016 9:34:26 PM PDT by Lurkus Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
Put your glasses down. Later in the article, the implications are listed, including:

"Under SB143, the state would record same-sex marriages."

This bill does nothing to protect marriage.

24 posted on 04/27/2016 9:36:31 PM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

Alabama surrenders.

No. They were smart.

It’s a shame that the sodomites pushed them to this.


25 posted on 04/27/2016 10:27:41 PM PDT by boycott (--s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

The bill means that the state of Alabama will not issue a marriage license to a homosexual couple. Sure, a homosexual couple may be able to find a liberal church somewhere to “marry” them, and the state will record the fact that they consider themselves married, but the state won’t license it.

Your state licenses homosexual marriage, correct?


26 posted on 04/27/2016 10:43:01 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Excellent idea


27 posted on 04/28/2016 12:01:21 AM PDT by wastedyears (I identify as an A-10 Warthog and am attracted to tanks. If you don't agree, you're otherkin phobic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker; OneVike

>> Good. Marriage is none of the states business.

Agreed.


28 posted on 04/28/2016 12:02:36 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Alabama surrenders.

Why should the government have gotten involved in marriage in the first place?

29 posted on 04/28/2016 12:02:59 AM PDT by wastedyears (I identify as an A-10 Warthog and am attracted to tanks. If you don't agree, you're otherkin phobic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

>> This suits the marriage saboteurs just fine.

Not at all.


30 posted on 04/28/2016 12:03:59 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Granting bureaucrats the right to control behavior is idiotic.


31 posted on 04/28/2016 12:06:03 AM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Awesome


32 posted on 04/28/2016 12:08:30 AM PDT by Rome2000 (SMASH THE CPUSA-SIC SEMPER TYRANNIS-CLOSE ALL MOSQUES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

It allows regular contract law apply instead of no fault divorce. You can create strong legal bonds again without the state involvement.


33 posted on 04/28/2016 12:09:00 AM PDT by RedWulf (Defeat Hillery or kiss the republic goodbye.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Alabama surrenders.

It may seem like it, but it's actually a right move. Nobody will be forced to go against their religious beliefs, as part of a State/Government job, to marry/issue a license, etc. This issue will never be put back in Pandora's Box so we might as well act sanely about it.

34 posted on 04/28/2016 3:30:02 AM PDT by trebb (Where in the the hell has my country gone?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

The next thing they should do is get out of the business of divorce. If the couple freely choses to enter into a union that states “until death do us part” then the state should have no authority to nullify that contract. If you do not like that provision then do not put it into your marriage contract. The introduction of no-fault divorce, which the states have imposed upon all marriages, basically outlawed marriage as it had be understood in the West (dare I say Christendom) for over a thousand years.


35 posted on 04/28/2016 3:35:54 AM PDT by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

because governments ALWAYS try to be God.


36 posted on 04/28/2016 3:41:30 AM PDT by MIA_eccl1212 (10 rounds 10 meters 10 seconds 10 centimetres)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OneVike
The legislation would abolish all requirements to obtain a marriage license in Alabama. Instead, probate judges would simply record civil contracts of marriage between two individuals based on signed affidavits.

How much you want to bet that the fee for recording the marriage will coincidentally equal the old cost of a marriage license?

37 posted on 04/28/2016 3:42:59 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
So if Alabama doesn’t have marriage then Alabama will not have homosexual marriage. What will the liberals say about this turn of events????

Sure they will. They just don't have to license it. Two gays find a minister to conduct a ceremony. They register with the state. It's done.

Which I assume also means that a gay couple can file their taxes as a married couple since the state registered the fact.

38 posted on 04/28/2016 3:46:21 AM PDT by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
>> This suits the marriage saboteurs just fine.

Not at all.

The Alabama bill as law will treat real marriage exactly the same as counterfeit marriage. That is what the sodomites were after, either the redefinition of marriage to include their agenda, or the total abolition of marriage as recognized by the state.

Tell me, will employers be able to refuse to offer spouse benefits to homosexual employees with this law in place? That answer will tell you everything.

39 posted on 04/28/2016 6:20:16 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: RedWulf
It will not be treated as normal contract law. Read the bill. Close relatives and all other combinations normally precluded from "marriage" in a normal world are still stipulated in the bill as not qualified. This bill does nothing that was not allowed before, except for a formal ceremony.

Only the furniture has been moved around on the deck of the sinking ship.

40 posted on 04/28/2016 6:23:10 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 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