A bill to eliminate marriage licenses in Alabama... (crime, cost, education)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One must be 18 to enter into a legal contract.
The government doesn't have a say in how people form their families voluntarily. They just have to follow the monogamous requirement to have a government sanctioned marriage.
Take it up with your state legislators.
"Because it's the law" is not an argument. It doesn't make it moral, just or fair.
Once upon a time, slavery was the law.
I am all for getting the government out of our life, marriage being one of them.
Excuse me, the kind of notary we are talking about is exactly government-sanctioned, and must keep careful records of every document s/he witnesses.
"A Notary Public is an official of integrity appointed by state government —typically by the secretary of state — to serve the public as an impartial witness in performing a variety of official fraud-deterrent acts related to the signing of important documents." https://www.nationalnotary.org/knowl...about-notaries
It needn't be government sanctioned. The function of notaries predates modern government, it's just someone who's job was to keep records and oversee contracts (and contracts also predate government).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg
That's correct. But it's correct for non-military as well.
Well thanks Captain Obvious, of course now to gain marriage benefits from a company, you'd need a government sanctioned certificate, unless the company permits extension of benefits to DP's. However since the Military is government how could it provide DP benefits if it did not sanction that DP. So by definition Military DP'S are going to be government sanctioned (unless the military is not an arm of government).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqueg
Not sure where you get the idea of 'most' here. Many employers offer very little by way of employee benefits, let alone spousal benefits. And some folks are working very hard to get companies owned by religious individuals/organizations off the hook for providing benefits to same-sex spouses.
I've never worked for a company in the US that extended benefits to families (state sanctioned marriage) that did not extend those to SSDP, and DSDPs. If a company does not extend benefits of course it's not going to extend them to domestic partnerships, "oh your married tough *****, if you were just a domestic partnership we'd cover your partner" said no one ever.
If a person is legal to enter a contract, that person is legal to marry. Marriage is just a contract.
Why should polygamy be illegal? Does love stop at 1, 2, 3 or 4 people? The government should have no say in how the people form their families voluntarily.
And it doesn't.
In legal terms, all it means is that if a couple wants to be legally married, if they meet the qualifications, the gov will recognize it. The couple then has legally enforceable rights and responsibilities toward each other, and are eligible for certain benefits, and many of those rights, responsibilities and/or benefits don't apply to non-legally-married couples.
Many couples are choosing to forego legal marriage, and there are polyamorous households in the US. No one cares, especially the government, as long as there is no indication of coercion or abuse.
It needn't be government sanctioned. The function of notaries predates modern government, it's just someone who's job was to keep records and oversee contracts (and contracts also predate government).
OK. Give me an example of a person who is not a government-sanctioned notary but whose notarization the government would accept in case of a legal dispute.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir
Well thanks Captain Obvious, of course now to gain marriage benefits from a company, you'd need a government sanctioned certificate, unless the company permits extension of benefits to DP's. However since the Military is government how could it provide DP benefits if it did not sanction that DP. So by definition Military DP'S are going to be government sanctioned (unless the military is not an arm of government).
Didn't say anything different. What I'm saying is that for a government to recognize your proposal for a "state of secular george" - or whatever name for an alternative to a marriage certificate you choose - to exist, the notary will have to be government-sanctioned in the case of non-military couples as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir
I've never worked for a company in the US that extended benefits to families (state sanctioned marriage) that did not extend those to SSDP, and DSDPs. If a company does not extend benefits of course it's not going to extend them to domestic partnerships, "oh your married tough *****, if you were just a domestic partnership we'd cover your partner" said no one ever.
You must be pretty young then. Because I have. It took a few court decisions over a decade or so for employers to be required to provide equal benefits to unmarried couples. And, as I noted, there is a well-funded effort to walk that back for same-sex couples.
Legal marriage is about nothing more than assets, benefits and legitimacy of heirs. Period, end of discussion.
We know this from the run up to gay marriage where gays and lesbians wanted those four hundred some odd benefits that come automatically to legally married couples including presumption of parenthood.
For hundreds of years before the state got involved the only persons who legally wed (by the Catholic Church usually) were royalty and others with wealth. In short those with property, assets, and needed to prove legal and legitimate heirs who would inherit crown/throne and lots of other goodies. The poor or whatever simply lived together until some roaming priest or whoever came around that could legally marry the couple.
Then as now plenty of straight couples simply cohabitate and not bother with formal legal marriage. If there aren't children involved, worries about property/assets, benefits or whatever then you *don't* need a legal marriage.
In France where cohabitation was made legal decades ago (PACS) via civil unions the largest numbers were straight couples, not gays as the law was originally intended to benefit.
In fact across France and much of Europe the trend is clear; many couples are going with cohabitation (legal framework or not) instead of legal marriage.
Marriage rates in the USA have been declining for decades. In fact you want to wonder why gays/lesbians made such a big noise about the matter. But then you look at who was funding/pushing that movement (white and or wealthy gay males or lesbians) and you see why; those were couples/persons who had assets, wealth, etc....
These gays/lesbians had or wanted to have children and often faced obstacles even if they were conceived via surrogacy due to lack of a "legal marriage".
I've never worked for a company in the US that extended benefits to families (state sanctioned marriage) that did not extend those to SSDP, and DSDPs. If a company does not extend benefits of course it's not going to extend them to domestic partnerships, "oh your married tough *****, if you were just a domestic partnership we'd cover your partner" said no one ever.
There are plenty of companies which do not provide benefits to domestic partners.
What law requires gay couples to get married? If they don't care about the rights/responsibilities/benefits of legal marriage, then they don't have to get married. Anymore than you would.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.