INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. (Jan. 11, 2017) – A bill introduced in the Indiana House would end government licensing of marriages in the state, effectively nullifying in practice both major sides of the contentious national debate over government-sanctioned marriage.There are a lot of ppl who foolishly say that disputes over marriage policy can be dodged by govt getting out of the marriage business.
Rep. Jim Lucas introduced House Bill 1163 (HB1163) on Jan. 9. The legislation would eliminate three marriage requirements currently in place in the state.
That individuals obtain a marriage license before getting married
That the marriage be solemnized by an individual specified by state law
That the marriage license be filed with a circuit court clerk and the state department of health.
The bill instead “provides for marriage by marriage contract by any two individuals who are competent to contract in Indiana or otherwise permitted to marry in Indiana.”
No chance. A lot of states already has common law marriage, so having marriages without govt-issued licenses is nothing new. The article gives the impression that the law would be a return to practice in previous centuries, but that is not true either. The Catholic Church has required marriage ceremonies for 800 years.
The govt has taken over a long list of marriage issues, such as this:
A man in Oklahoma is hoping to change the law after he has to continue to pay child support for a baby that is not his, according to our affiliate KOTV.Oklahoma has common law marriage, but this problem is independent of that.
When Thomas’ high school girlfriend got pregnant, he married her. Five months later she had a little boy and he believed he had a son, but their marriage fell apart.
Thomas decided to take a paternity test when the boy was three years old.
“It comes back zero percent. I was in my office and I saw that. I should’ve expected it but I didn’t and it hit me. I’m telling my co-worker how shocked I am that someone could do this to someone,” he said.
The judge ordered Thomas to take another DNA test and he got the same result. The judge first ruled that Thomas was off the hook financially, but then reversed the decision because Oklahoma law says men must question paternity within two years of the child’s birth.
Thomas said that he had no reason to question it before he did, but, because he missed the deadline, the judge ordered him to pay around $500 a month in child support and nearly $15,000 in back support – for a child that is not his.
There have been many changes to marriage law, and they are nearly all to increase state control over families. Same-sex marriage is just one of those changes.
Update: It is divorce season.
Post a Comment