It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The government has no business recognizing that a State of Marriage exists
Correct. They are just looking for votes for themselves, in the meantime they are paid to do useless things.
originally posted by: Kali74
Texas is losing what little brains it had left. Two bills in short order that make what already is law... law again? double the pleasure, double the fun? Texas is so big it has to do everything twice?
Yeehaw y'all!
I see this issue running along the same lines as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It's a given ... and several words in the Bill of Rights are too often casually overlooked. Do the words "Shall Make No Law" and "Shall Not Be Infringed" carry so little weight?
yet tell them it was not legally binding and I could not sign the marriage paperwork.
In almost every state, 3 signatures are needed on paperwork from the municipality. 2 adult witnesses and a clergy member or a town clerk or judge (almost any clergy will do, the local pastor or a mail order minister- just not a Ship Captain in most places). Then the paperwork must be filed.
originally posted by: TheBoomersRBusted
a reply to: FarleyWayne I would imagine the SC decision going in favor of ssm, if there is one, will apply to government officials like judges, city clerks, Justice of the Peace or any govt official who can legally perform marriage. You don't need a church, and if a clergy who does not have a govt paper marries a couple I doubt it counts in court. The marriage laws are civil laws. Churches have their own rules and certainly don't respect all of each others' now anyway. What am I missing?
If you meant same sex marriage, I can do that in NY state. It would be legally binding with 2 adult witnesses signing as well. If it is some other type of non-traditional marriage between more than 2 adults, that is when I state I cannot sign paperwork.
originally posted by: J.B. Aloha
We are on the same page then.
yet tell them it was not legally binding and I could not sign the marriage paperwork.
I wanted only rites of matrimony when my wife and I got 'married' knowing full well the above. I avoid government franchises like the plague they are. But, I acquiesced and we went the civil route.
The Boy Scouts were never a Christian organization. They were pulled into the present day, kind of kicking and screaming to allow gay scouts. But, they don;t allow gay scout leaders at this time, one day I believe they will.
originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: kaylaluv
The Boy Scouts didn't require the courts to intervene. Local gov'ts did it for them. They called the Boys Scouts of America "Bigoted' banned them from using schools and Community centers all over the country. marginalized them for their Christian basics.
It was adapt or loose out in the long run.
I would have been happy to perform the ceremony And sign papers if wanted...or not sign papers if not wanted.
originally posted by: J.B. Aloha
a reply to: reldra
Yes, Same Sex Marriage, and in my understanding of how the 'pastoral hats' are juggled. I am all for freedom of contract [as inline with law]. Though, contracting with any government [for benefit or protection] is dangerous business to begin with, but I digress.