Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Oklahoma bill would put an end to marriage licenses

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Oklahoma bill would put an end to marriage licenses

    Oklahoma bill would put an end to marriage licenses
    Oklahoma state Rep. Todd Russ, R-Cordell, has filed a bill that would put an end to marriage licenses in the state. Under his plan, a religious official would sign a couple’s marriage certificate, which would then be filed with the court clerk.



    Marriage licenses would become a thing of the past in Oklahoma under a bill filed by state Rep. Todd Russ.

    The Cordell Republican says he wants to protect court clerks from having to issue licenses to same-sex couples. He doesn’t want these workers put in the position of having to condone or facilitate same-sex marriage.
    Photo - State Rep. Todd Russ R-Cordell <strong></strong>
    State Rep. Todd Russ R-Cordell

    Under his plan, a religious official would sign a couple’s marriage certificate, which would then be filed with the clerk. Marriages would no longer be performed by judges. If a couple did not have a religious official to preside over their wedding, they could file an affidavit of common law marriage.

    “Marriages are not supposed to be a government thing anyway,” he said Wednesday.

    Russ, a credentialed Assemblies of God minister, is upset with rulings that have supported same-sex marriage.

    “There’s a lot of constituents and people across the state who are not through pushing back on the federal government for the slam down they’ve given us with Supreme Court rulings,” he said.

    Same-sex marriage became legal in Oklahoma in October. That’s when the high court declined to review a federal court decision striking down a voter-approved ban on the practice.

    It is now legal in 36 states and the District of Columbia. On Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to determine whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.

    In 2004, Oklahoma voters approved, 1,075,216 to 347,303, a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.

    “Oklahoma voted overwhelmingly against same-sex marriage, and yet the Supreme Court stuck it down our throats,” Russ said.

    He called his House Bill 1125 an example of “conscience legislation,” meant to allow people to exercise their religious values in good conscience. He compared it to Hobby Lobby’s case against the contraception mandate in the Affordable Care Act.

    Rep. David Brumbaugh, R-Broken Arrow, has also filed legislation concerning same-sex marriage. His bill seeks to prevent religious officials from having to “solemnize or recognize any marriage that violates the official’s conscience or religious beliefs.”

    He said pastors came to him concerned that if they didn’t officiate same-sex marriages, their churches could lose tax-exempt status.

    Toby Jenkins, executive director of Oklahomans for Equality, said that between Oct. 6 and mid-December, his group has documented 3,165 same-sex marriages in 23 counties.

    He expressed disappointment with the two bills involving same-sex marriage.

    “I was so hoping that our legislators would attend to the duties of our state and big issues like education, health care, dealing with crime and crumbling infrastructure,” he said. “I hoped they would make that their focus, but once again it sounds like Oklahoma legislators have decided to pick on a portion of our population.

    “For 23 years, at least one anti-gay bill has been introduced every session. I was so hoping 2015 would be different.”

    I wear a Fez. Fez-es are cool

  • #2
    That's a stupid idea.
    ZOMBIE REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!!! heh

    Comment


    • #3
      That is a great idea. You shouldn't need a license to get married anyway.
      I don't like Republicans, but I really FUCKING hate Democrats.


      Sex with an Asian woman is great, but 30 minutes later you're horny again.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Forever_frost View Post

        “Marriages are not supposed to be a government thing anyway,” he said Wednesday.
        yup.
        WRX

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by YALE View Post
          That's a stupid idea.
          Originally posted by LANTIRN View Post
          That is a great idea.. .
          And the reason I love this board.
          "If I asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." - Henry Ford

          Comment


          • #6
            It'll cause probate issues.
            ZOMBIE REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!!! heh

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by YALE View Post
              It'll cause probate issues.
              and depending on who is getting married "It'll cause prostate issues."

              god bless.
              It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men -Frederick Douglass

              Comment


              • #8
                They're just taking the anus off the state, which is now required to grant same sex marriage licenses, and putting it on the so called "religious officials" who can sign or not sign marriage certificates as they please.
                Originally posted by Broncojohnny
                HOORAY ME and FUCK YOU!

                Comment


                • #9
                  he said anus.
                  "If I asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." - Henry Ford

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Those are gems, gentlemen. Well played.
                    ZOMBIE REAGAN FOR PRESIDENT 2016!!! heh

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      They should have never existed to begin with.
                      Originally posted by racrguy
                      What's your beef with NPR, because their listeners are typically more informed than others?
                      Originally posted by racrguy
                      Voting is a constitutional right, overthrowing the government isn't.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Broncojohnny View Post
                        They should have never existed to begin with.
                        Bingo. I agree with getting rid of them. It's sad that butt hurt is what is driving it, though, and I disagree with the whole "religious official" thing. Some heterosexual people are atheists, so now they are at the mercy of hypocritical Christians as well? The Republicans are turning in to pathetic, petty, misguided people.
                        Originally posted by BradM
                        But, just like condoms and women's rights, I don't believe in them.
                        Originally posted by Leah
                        In other news: Brent's meat melts in your mouth.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by nash b. View Post
                          they're just taking the anus off the state, which is now required to grant same sex marriage licenses, and putting it on the so called "religious officials" who can sign or not sign marriage certificates as they please.
                          anus?
                          Half of history is hiding the past.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by silverhatch View Post
                            anus?

                            Yes. Anus.
                            Originally posted by BradM
                            But, just like condoms and women's rights, I don't believe in them.
                            Originally posted by Leah
                            In other news: Brent's meat melts in your mouth.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              To me this doesn't make it any harder for same sex couples to marry. They just have to get someone "ordained" through the Universal Life Church, or the likes, to sign the certificate.

                              Not sure how this could cause "probate" issues, as they will still recognize it as a marriage as long as signed off on by a "religious official", either way.

                              It could also actually create additional business opportunities for wedding officiants specializing in gay marriages.

                              What was the original purpose for requiring a license anyways? Wasn't it just to ensure that brothers and sisters can't marry, and that sort of thing? Oh, and so the state could get some additional revenue, of course..

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X