Missouri Bill - Only Religious Weddings to be Considered "Marriage"

For discussion of all aspects of human rights
Post Reply
User avatar
MattShizzle
Posts: 18963
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:22 pm
Location: Bernville, PA

Missouri Bill - Only Religious Weddings to be Considered "Marriage"

Post by MattShizzle » Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:31 am

link

More from the Christian Taliban.
Non-religious need not apply: A new bill in Missouri would redefine any marriage that take place outside of a church as a “domestic union.”

House Bill 1424, introduced by State Rep. T.J. Berry, a Republican lawmaker and ordained church deacon, would essentially restrict all marriage to people of faith by redefining any marriage not solemnized inside a church as a “domestic union.”

Pink News notes:

The bill would define marriage as being a union that takes place only in religious institutions.

Any marriages that were to take place outside of the church, for example in a registry office, would only be recognised as “domestic unions.”

Sponsors of the bill say that the change in definition would work to protect churches and businesses against “gay encroachment.”

David McAfee, writing for Friendly Atheist, spoke with Rep. Berry, a member and deacon at First Baptist Church of Kearney, Missouri. Berry admits that his bill was an attempt to redefine marriage in favor of churches, noting:

If someone wants to go through a religious ceremony they may go to the church that they feel comfortable with. If a couple wants to receive government benefits they would get a civil document from the government.

Supporters of the bill claim the new law redefining marriage would act as “a remedy to controversies across the country involving government employees who object to issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples for religious reasons.”
Meant to discriminate against both LGBT and non-religious. Maybe we need to get ordained in the FSM church?

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:40 am

The bill looks a tad unconstitutional to me. Marriage is ensconced in secular law, is it not? Can't discriminate on account of religion.

User avatar
Roo St. Gallus
Posts: 8148
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:32 pm
Location: Cascadia

Post by Roo St. Gallus » Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:54 pm

Yep. Those gay marriages will have to be held in gay churches.

Boy will they miss the fun, huh?

Will somebody let the vicar out of the closet, please?
IF YOU'RE NOT OUTRAGED, YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION!

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Sat Jan 27, 2018 8:15 pm

Turns out the bill contravenes the Equal Protection Clause contained in the 14th Amendment. If it passes, it won't be on Missouri's statute books for long. The Supreme Court will knock it out despite the fact that the judges' panel is stacked.

User avatar
MattShizzle
Posts: 18963
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:22 pm
Location: Bernville, PA

Post by MattShizzle » Sat Jan 27, 2018 9:15 pm

I'm sure the first federal court will throw it out, the appeals courts will agree and the SC probably won't even agree to hear it if the state appeals.

User avatar
Politesse
Posts: 19647
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:28 am
Location: Chochenyo territory

Post by Politesse » Sat Jan 27, 2018 9:16 pm

This seems like an odd strategy to me, but maybe it makes more sense in Missouri? I've known I think 10 married gay couples well, and of those, only 2 were married in a civil ceremony, the others either handfasted or found a friendly church. Most people actually like the pomp and circumstance of a religious ritual, even if they aren't all that religious personally.
"The truth about stories is that's all we are" ~Thomas King

User avatar
MattShizzle
Posts: 18963
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 6:22 pm
Location: Bernville, PA

Post by MattShizzle » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:47 pm

If they can find a Unitarian church they can have a non-religious Church wedding gay, straight, atheist, whatever. Or if there are any actual FSM churches/temples/whatever out there.

User avatar
Roo St. Gallus
Posts: 8148
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:32 pm
Location: Cascadia

Post by Roo St. Gallus » Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:51 pm

[quote=""Politesse""]This seems like an odd strategy to me, but maybe it makes more sense in Missouri? I've known I think 10 married gay couples well, and of those, only 2 were married in a civil ceremony, the others either handfasted or found a friendly church. Most people actually like the pomp and circumstance of a religious ritual, even if they aren't all that religious personally.[/quote]

My experience as well. The religion was not Christian fundamentalist, but there was distinctly religion present and consciously involved.

I, myself, am a minister of the Universal Life Church. The 'church' and 'religion' bars are low ones.

Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare.

*facepalm*

Yes, if passed, it WILL be declared null and void by the federal courts as unconstitutional.
IF YOU'RE NOT OUTRAGED, YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION!

User avatar
Cheerful Charlie
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Sep 27, 2017 8:12 am

Post by Cheerful Charlie » Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:53 pm

The Church of Satan wedding chapel is going to get a lot of business.
Cheerful Charlie

User avatar
crazyfingers
Posts: 2410
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 12:55 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post by crazyfingers » Mon Feb 26, 2018 12:32 am

Funny how when the Puritans colonized New England they strictly believed that marriage was a civil function and not a religious one. Marriage was conducted and established by the civil authorities.

User avatar
justme
Posts: 5994
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:31 am

Post by justme » Sun Mar 04, 2018 5:18 pm

Christianity is only one religion and as it is that those withing Christian say that God created marriage are those who have read into the Bible to pick out something that they can us and do so, I would submit that these people are not Christian. They simply like the name Christian and bestow it upon themselves so they can justify their activities.

If Georgia wants to do this, then they are going to do it, but it's not because of Christianity. It's because of their own assumptions and prejudices.

sohy
Posts: 10981
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:32 pm
Location: Georgia, USA

Post by sohy » Mon Mar 05, 2018 9:20 pm

Missouri, not Georgia.

Anyway, before we get excited about this, let's remember it's just a bill. Almost every state has at least a few crazy people in government who come up with crazy extremist bills that never become laws. Wake me up if it passes the Missouri legislature and their governor signs it into law.

User avatar
Jobar
Posts: 26251
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:42 pm
Location: Georgia

Post by Jobar » Tue Mar 06, 2018 3:43 am

Hmm. I wonder if gay-hating churches can start claiming that their marriage ceremonies are only for 'holy matrimony' or some other similar term, defined as one man + one woman? No law need be passed for that, does it? Let 'em make up their own word for it!

Post Reply