House passes bill to abolish Oklahoma marriage licenses

[mfcorey1]

Sparked by controversy over same-sex marriages, the Oklahoma House of Representatives passed a bill Tuesday that would abolish government-issued Oklahoma marriage licenses.

“The point of my legislation is to take the state out of the process and leave marriage in the hands of the clergy,” said state Rep. Todd Russ, R-Cordell, the bill’s House author. “Marriage was historically a religious covenant first and a government-recognized contract second. Under my bill, the state is not allowing or disallowing same-sex marriage. It is simply leaving it up to the clergy.”

Under House Bill 1125, marriage licenses would be replaced by marriage certificates issued by clergy and others authorized to perform marriage ceremonies. The bill passed the House 67-24 and will now go to the Senate for consideration.

Russ’ bill sparked spirited discussion on the House floor, with some Democrat lawmakers arguing that the bill could have unintended consequences — like eliminating the state’s ability to stop bigamy or polygamy.

http://newsok.com/house-passes-bill-to-abolish-oklahoma-marriage-licenses/article/5400240

[marym625]

1. horrible people!

[meaculpa2011]

2. Bigamy is fraud. It's against the law.

Polygamy is a contract between consenting adults. So is same-sex marriage.

The state should not have the authority to approve or disapprove of any marriage.

BTW: No church should have that authority. Go to a lawyer, agree to a contract of marriage... done.

[HereSince1628]

5. I see individual contracts as potentially very different, and that could make legal actions

surrounding marriage difficult.

Standardizing core-issues of everyone's marriage so that regulated commerce, property ownership etc could facilitated would require government legal action, isn't that essentially what marriage licenses do?

A default of equal rights to marriage and equal protection for all who consent to enter it seems a better way to go. Those parties who wish to construct further covenants through a contract (such as a pre-nuptual agreement) still could.

[RKP5637]

3. Full fledged idiots, as usual. Must be a very fragile state if the small number of

same sex couples that "might" get married are going to topple the state. Also, I've always wondered WTF business it is of the state or the clergy whom gets married. It is more a legal issue, not some bizarre moralistic issue IMO.

[el_bryanto]

4. There are two components to marriage i think

One is the strictly legal rights and privileges it gives spouses, the other is the acceptance of the community. The latter is why the approval of the state or church has been seen as important; it's an official body saying "Yes these two are married now," with all the symbolism and meaning that applies.

The latter is why people want the government or the churchs to determine what a "real" marriage, so that they can say to people who are not married in the appropriate way, in their opinion, that their marriage doesn't count.

Bryant