Alabama moves to eliminate marriage licenses

[Tresha91203]

The government should have never been involved in the marriage business to begin with. All financial and medical planning could have been done by contract. The nonmarriage contract could be enforced or dissolved like any other contract. Tax credits were just a fast, lazy way to favor a certain pet here and there. The tax code is ridiculously complicated anyway, so those could be tossed as far as I am concerned. I've always believed it sketchy to subject the people to laws most legislators don't understand, much less laypeople.

I think they should name this new process/bill/contract/whatever "Rainbow" something or some name that says FU. It would be fitting IMO and a clear reminder of why we're here now. If it turns out to be a massive improvement, thank you rainbows. If it is a disaster, why did those sore losers take their ball and go home knowing it would destroy the field? I've got that kind of sense of humor, though.

 

[Slyhunter]

The operative being "might"

Of course it is. I haven't read the bill. I don't know if it would restrict recognition of marriage to those sanctioned by religious institutions. If it does, then there would probably be a first amendment issue. If it provides a means by which people can be married without resorting to religious institutions, then there is probably no constitutional problem.

That means forcing someone to create a non-religious group for the purpose of marrying someone. You can't force someone to make a group.

 

[bodecea]

Good the government should not be in the marriage business to begin with.
Why should you need the government's approval to get married, not to mention paying them for the privilege.

Sad for those who do not get a marriage license....their divorces and child custodies and survivor benefit situations are going to be rather interesting.

That's a matter of personal responsibility. Wills and separation, are issues one can prepare for, without a governmental, cookie-cutter, indiscriminate, "safety net".
It requires one to take not only responsibility; but to take action, as well...

And money.

 

[bodecea]

I love how Alabama looks over this.

 

[SwimExpert]

That means forcing someone to create a non-religious group for the purpose of marrying someone. You can't force someone to make a group.

No it doesn't. The requirement to have some official preside over a wedding ceremony is a relatively recent phenomenon in human societies. There was a time when the only thing that was required for two people to be legally married was for them to choose to live together as a married couple. That may have happened by simply moving in together and declaring themselves married, or it might have been done via a contract between themselves and/or families. The "common law" marriage continues to exist to this day, to varying degree. However, in most places common law marriages have been downgraded to the equivalent of an "unofficial" marriage-like state.

If the state of Alabama were to reintroduce the common law marriage to an equal status as those created via a formal wedding ceremony that would be one way to do it. Another would be to simply widen the category of people authorized to perform a wedding ceremony to any person whatsoever. A couple could choose their best friend, a parent or other family member, or the local Elvis impersonator, and have a wedding ceremony, if that person was so willing to be a part of it.

 

[Vastator]

I love how Alabama looks over this.

Me too. I think this is a first.

 

[Ernie S.]

The operative being "might"

Of course it is. I haven't read the bill. I don't know if it would restrict recognition of marriage to those sanctioned by religious institutions. If it does, then there would probably be a first amendment issue. If it provides a means by which people can be married without resorting to religious institutions, then there is probably no constitutional problem.

That means forcing someone to create a non-religious group for the purpose of marrying someone. You can't force someone to make a group.

The state still has judges an Justices of the Peace. No one is forcing anything. The bill would simply remove 1 layer of bureaucracy.

 

[Ernie S.]

I love how Alabama looks over this.

So do I.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

All states should be remove marriage licenses. It's just one more government intrusion into people's lives.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Alabama Moves to Eliminate Marriage Licenses

Good. I GUARANTEE the butt fucker hate brigade will attack this with ALL its might because what they TRULY want is the state to be forced to recognize their disgusting idea of marriage! GOOD JOB ALABAMA! Let the ignorant tirades and hate filled comments against Alabama and Southerns begin!

Bill failed

Alabama Marriage License Vote

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Alabama Moves to Eliminate Marriage Licenses

Good. I GUARANTEE the butt fucker hate brigade will attack this with ALL its might because what they TRULY want is the state to be forced to recognize their disgusting idea of marriage! GOOD JOB ALABAMA! Let the ignorant tirades and hate filled comments against Alabama and Southerns begin!

So? That only goes to show how brain-dead rightwingers are. They would rather not recognize over a million marriages among heterosexuals so that they don't have to recognize thousands of gay marriages. Talk about throwing the baby out with the bath water.

No, what theyre saying is that gay marriage has turned the whole thing into a joke....and it has.

 

[the_human_being]

Alabama Moves to Eliminate Marriage Licenses

Good. I GUARANTEE the butt fucker hate brigade will attack this with ALL its might because what they TRULY want is the state to be forced to recognize their disgusting idea of marriage! GOOD JOB ALABAMA! Let the ignorant tirades and hate filled comments against Alabama and Southerns begin!

This is a good move. It will show the Supreme Court that there are ways around their circumventing the will of the people and the invalidation of the votes of the majority. It is, in effect, a fight against the Supreme Court's usurping of State's rights under the constitution. Look for other states to follow suit.

 

[Syriusly]

Looks like there may be a way around the Supreme Court's ruling voiding the will of the people and States' Rights under the Constitution.

Alabama Marriage License Vote

LOL- a failed vote?

Alabama A proposal to get the state of Alabama out of the marriage business has failed within the state legislature. The Alabama House has not approved a proposal that was previously given the green light by the state senate. The bill would have done away with state issued marriage licenses. Wednesday's vote in the Alabama House was 53 to 36 in favor of the measure. However, two-third's approval was needed in that chamber for the bill to pass. That approval rating was needed because the item was not on Governor Robert Bentley's agenda for the special session.


If the measure would have passed it would have virtually taken the state of Alabama out of the marriage business. Instead, it would have required couples to take a signed marriage contract and file it with the probate office.


Supporters of the bill say it would have prevented probate judges, who oppose same-sex marriage, from having to sign licenses for gay couples.

If any State wants to stop issuing marriage licenses and instead recognizes marriages by a filed contract- fine with me.

Of course some idiot in the Probate Office would whine that it hurts his religious feelings having to file gay marriage contracts....

 

[Theowl32]

The government should have never been involved in the marriage business to begin with. All financial and medical planning could have been done by contract. The nonmarriage contract could be enforced or dissolved like any other contract. Tax credits were just a fast, lazy way to favor a certain pet here and there. The tax code is ridiculously complicated anyway, so those could be tossed as far as I am concerned. I've always believed it sketchy to subject the people to laws most legislators don't understand, much less laypeople.

I think they should name this new process/bill/contract/whatever "Rainbow" something or some name that says FU. It would be fitting IMO and a clear reminder of why we're here now. If it turns out to be a massive improvement, thank you rainbows. If it is a disaster, why did those sore losers take their ball and go home knowing it would destroy the field? I've got that kind of sense of humor, though.

You have to understand that the left would have found another way to make gay people victims of right wing Christian republicans.

The democrats are not interested in getting any solution. They are only interested in dividing, conquering, and sustaining power.

To hell with anyone that gets in their way. They have figured out how to do it. Not by violence but through seductive speech, false promises and scapegoating. They need people with a lot to lose. The more the democrats GIVE THEM the more RELIANT they become. The more RELIANT the more they are owned.

All of these pieces of brainwashed shit that post here know I am right too. They are too pathetic to admit it.

 

[bodecea]

The government should have never been involved in the marriage business to begin with. All financial and medical planning could have been done by contract. The nonmarriage contract could be enforced or dissolved like any other contract. Tax credits were just a fast, lazy way to favor a certain pet here and there. The tax code is ridiculously complicated anyway, so those could be tossed as far as I am concerned. I've always believed it sketchy to subject the people to laws most legislators don't understand, much less laypeople.

I think they should name this new process/bill/contract/whatever "Rainbow" something or some name that says FU. It would be fitting IMO and a clear reminder of why we're here now. If it turns out to be a massive improvement, thank you rainbows. If it is a disaster, why did those sore losers take their ball and go home knowing it would destroy the field? I've got that kind of sense of humor, though.

You have to understand that the left would have found another way to make gay people victims of right wing Christian republicans.

The democrats are not interested in getting any solution. They are only interested in dividing, conquering, and sustaining power.

To hell with anyone that gets in their way. They have figured out how to do it. Not by violence but through seductive speech, false promises and scapegoating. They need people with a lot to lose. The more the democrats GIVE THEM the more RELIANT they become. The more RELIANT the more they are owned.

All of these pieces of brainwashed shit that post here know I am right too. They are too pathetic to admit it.

Interesting. I guess any RW Republican who isn't "christian" doesn't matter to you.

 

[the_human_being]

Yeah....sure.

Yeah. Sure. The Supreme Court Justices are not the only ones who can think out of the box.

 

[Preacher]

Alabama Moves to Eliminate Marriage Licenses

Good. I GUARANTEE the butt fucker hate brigade will attack this with ALL its might because what they TRULY want is the state to be forced to recognize their disgusting idea of marriage! GOOD JOB ALABAMA! Let the ignorant tirades and hate filled comments against Alabama and Southerns begin!

Bill failed

Alabama Marriage License Vote

Wednesday's vote in the Alabama House was 53 to 36 in favor of the measure. However, two-third's approval was needed in that chamber for the bill to pass. That approval rating was needed because the item was not on Governor Robert Bentley's agenda for the special session.

Idiots. Why not wait until the regular session begins? Sigh....anyways you know when the regular session begins so they can get this passed and stop having homosexuals harassing people.

 

[Preacher]

The Legislature convenes in regular annual sessions on the first Tuesday in February, except (1) in the first year of the four-year term, when the session will begin on the first Tuesday in March, and (2) in the last year of a four-year term, when the session will begin on the second Tuesday in January

So February or March. He was just re elected last November.

 

[WorldWatcher]

>

Ya'll realize that the thread title is incorrect right?

The proposed law would not have "ended marriage", it would have changed how Civil Marriage was entered into. At the end of the day the couple is still married in the eyes of the State of Alabama.


>>>>

 

[bendog]

Looks like there may be a way around the Supreme Court's ruling voiding the will of the people and States' Rights under the Constitution.

Alabama Marriage License Vote

Gays will still get married. Alabama courts will still have to enforce marriage contracts between gays. I don't see much of a win for homophobes here. If your church doesn't want to marry gays .... don't marry them.

oops duplicate thread. My bad.