General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHot damn..Alabama is doing something SANE!
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All requirements to obtain a marriage license by the State of Alabama are hereby abolished and repealed.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 states 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 Governors desk.
If passed into law, SB143 would accomplish two things.
First, it would effectively render void the edicts of federal judges that have overturned state laws defining marriage. The founding generation never envisioned unelected judges issuing ex cathedra pronouncements regarding the definition of social institutions like marriage and the Constitution delegates the federal judiciary no authority to meddle in the issue. Constitutionally, marriage is an issue left to the state and the people.
Second, the bill would limit the states role in defining and regulating marriage, ending the squabble between factions seeking to harness the power of the state.
State involvement in marriages begin with racial discrimination lasw.
before that, people recorded marriages in the family Bible or some such paper, until a visiting preacher could come along and make it offcial.
By trying to avoid marrying same sex couples, this law would make void all old state laws. Hot damn.
liberaltrucker
(9,129 posts)**Expat Alabamian living in Pennsylvania**
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Let's just hope they don't figure out how accidentally liberal they will be.
liberaltrucker
(9,129 posts)Coming down for a visit sometime this summer.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)and put them in the hands of preachers? I'm not sure that is such a good thing.
EX500rider
(10,848 posts)You file the paperwork and you are married.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)or solely in the hands of preachers.
History will show you why and how the State got involved in marriage laws
but before then, for hundreds of years, people became married at what we know as a county/community level,
no licenses, and often months before a preacher showed up to do a religious ceremony.
In Europe, civil marriages are quite common, involving signatures on a form.
This law will simply have marriages recorded, like births and deaths are recorded, at the county Gov. level.
No licenses will be needed.
No county judges will perform any ceremony.
Anyone can also have a religious ceremony if they want, but that will be in addition to the recording at the courthouse.
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)We will eliminate it.
Just watch, they will try to make an end-around the SCOTUS ruling.
This is only the first step.
This is done as a reaction to gay marriage.
there wasn't a push to get government out of marriage before that.
Motive, and timing make this suspicious.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)It will eliminate the Probate Judge from officiating at the marriage
and remove the required license.
Instead, the only thing that will change is the paperwork to get married
Marriage will be a form registration process.
the form will be legal, so will the marriage.
It is done this way all over the world, esp. Europe, as a civil marriage.
Makes the bigoted county clerks happy, makes it easier in fact to get married,
does not prevent any religious service after the forms are signed.
To my mind, it is a win-win.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)many times I have needed marriage and divorce papers to qualify for some program. These programs are also going to have to change.
Democat
(11,617 posts)If it's only a problem for minorities, they might not care.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)If you get married in Ala. today, you buy a license.
someone ( a judge, or a minister,) mumbles some words in front of you and signs a marriage certificate.
The license and certificate are kept by the county for their records.
That is why when you need them, you can get a copy.
Under the new law, a copy of the registry form will be kept, and I imagine they will charge about the same fee as they did for a license.
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)And any claim of child support...not such a great idea.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Marriage is still gonna happen.
records are still gonna be kept.
The only thing that will change is the paperwork to get married
and the elimination of the probate judge to say some words.
Marriage will be a form registration process.
the form will be legal, so will the marriage, so divorce will still go on.
It is done this way all over the world, esp. Europe, as a civil marriage.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)separation of church and state. If so, Alabama has always performed only civil unions, of course, and never did perform sacred unions, i.e., what "marriage" is considered to be to religious people.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)Alabama now is just like any other state, where you get a license, you choose whether to have a county judge,or a justice of the peace, or a minister mumble the words.
The new law will eliminate the license and the county judge, and instead will deem a marriage is valid by the couple signing a marriage form.
One can still have a religious ceremony in addition to that.
It still will forbid underage marriages.
pnwmom
(108,978 posts)I'm not going to applaud them for that.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)It really does make things easier for most people now, tho.