A Stop To Courthouse Weddings? A Good Start
Interesting idea in a reason blog item by Scott Shackford. Unfortunately, the blog post comes out a story of clerks in 14 Florida counties wanting to discriminate against gay couples wanting to marry (though not being able to under the law).
I agree with what Scott writes about the "mistaken belief that the government has any sort of stake in determining the nature of relationships among consenting adults":
Florida has even managed to add some extra rent-seeking in its process of acknowledging marriages. Their marriage licenses come with a three-day delay before taking effect, unless couples are willing to take a four-hour premarital course from an approved counselor. Those folks can get married the same day. One county clerk told the Tampa Bay Times she would be waiving the course for the first round of ceremonies tomorrow. Maybe she should just waive it forever and recognize the government has no place ordering people to seek training in how to be a married couple.Obviously this decision does nothing about the actual problem of so many government policies and benefit structures inappropriately tied to marital status. But getting government functionaries out of the business of literally performing wedding ceremonies is a right move for the wrong reasons. I acknowledge that gay people getting married inside of (or in front of) courthouses makes for lovely, photogenic moments in a movement where the government has long served as a barrier or a threat. I'd much rather see us move to the place where we're the ones telling the government about our relationships (should we choose to do so) and away from a place where we're begging the government to allow it.
"I agree with what Scott writes about the "mistaken belief that the government has any sort of stake in determining the nature of relationships among consenting adults":"
Well, line up over there with the other damned idiots ignorant of basic social structures.
This is beyond stupid. Such people will scream to the State immediately if they think their property rights are not being observed. These rights are directly obliged by the relationships these people choose.
And if you think the individual gets no benefit from the State tracking their household, including marital status, then you've never spent one second in probate court - as the State tries to figure out who owes what to whom as a matter of inheritance.
Now - if you actually support the idea of a nation of propertyless people -- if you cannot tell the difference between occupancy, possession and ownership -- then you should probably go play on the monkey bars.
This isn't new. The tribe has ALWAYS been invested in its offspring. The new part is that you've been effectively sold the idea that you don't have to exercise any responsibilities at all to pay for the rights you enjoy. That saddens me greatly.
Radwaste at January 5, 2015 11:10 PM
You can have a consensual relationship without marriage, with no courts. Marriage adds a contractual relationship and a set of legal obligations. You absolutely need the government involved for legal contracts, whats next, they wont notarize wills?
NicoleK at January 6, 2015 12:00 AM
Civil (courthouse) marriage ceremonies had been offered before, but now these clerks have decided on their own to just stop marrying people altogether because they're not allowed to discriminate against same-sex couples.
Too bad they can't just call themselves a "Christian organization" (like hobby lobby) and go on discriminating all they like.
DrCos at January 6, 2015 3:56 AM
There were three reasons listed by our county clerk in our local paper.
One was, the county clerk didn't want to force its employees to perform marriages that go against their beliefs. I was stunned that they'd admit that publicly, but there you go.
Two was, local government is financially strapped and it had to cut costs somewhere.
Three was an entirely libertarian take, that courthouse weddings deprived the private sector of possible revenue.
It was one of the weirder newspaper articles I've read recently.
flbeachmom at January 6, 2015 7:55 AM
Yes. And no property rights, visitation rights, or powers of attorney attend those relationships. Legal marriage adds those things.
====================
I'm stunned the county clerk admitted that government employees are allowed to have religious beliefs.
Conan the Grammarian at January 6, 2015 9:28 AM
"I'm stunned the county clerk admitted that government employees are allowed to have religious beliefs." - Conan the Grammarian
Actually flbeachmom wrote "go against their beliefs." Her post did not connect those beliefs to religion. There are plenty of people who are against homosexuality and don't use God and the Bible as references for their beliefs.
Fayd at January 6, 2015 11:03 AM
That's my point, Conan. Govt doesn't need tobe involved in who you boff, but does need to be involved in property rights, etc.
NicoleK at January 6, 2015 10:00 PM
Leave a comment