4 years ago5,000+ Views
I'm pretty confused about this one: the Oklahoma House passed a bill to Senate that would require that all marriages are done through religion, because "marriage was created by religion, not by government, and they shouldn't have a say in it."
Marriage, though, was probably started for totally secular reasons. Contracts that can be considered equal to today's marriage papers have been around for so long. It was the 24th Council of Trent, in around 1560, which brought the church into marriage. Prior to that, marriage was a secular institution entirely overseen by the local government.
This means that anyone who doesn't want to be religiously married would have to go through a common-law marriage instead, which makes taxes and other aspects of married life more difficult.
Mostly I'm confused that A) something so backwards is attempting to be passed in an attempt to stop gay marriage and B) these people don't realize how this would also hurt themselves. Many people already married would now be considered common-law marriages, leading to all sorts of troubles. The whole idea is "Oh we'll let the churches decide who gets married" with him assuming every church is bigoted as he is. But the thing is, there are many LGBT friendly churches and so he's effectively legalized gay marriage.
You can read the full bill here. Please, someone read it and tell me I'm misunderstanding, because this is ridiculous. What is going on in Oklahoma?!
1 Share
@amog32 My thought is that if it isn't clear to anyone reading the bill what it does and doesn't allow, it's not a good bill.
Well, I couldn't find out many updates, but it seems that many people think news are over reacting about this bill. If you read the details, it does make some changes but people are still able to marry without being religious. However, the language used is different, which brings it back to my idea that religion shouldn't even be in the government's bill regarding marriage at all, unless it is to say something like regardless of marriage. This bill uses language like "denomination" which refers to Christian religions, and only adds Jewish thoughts to that, meaning that it's still treating religions differently.
@yakwithalan Who knows. I'm going to go search for an update on this. I'll let you all know what I find out.
Who will be the first one to publicly condemn this bill?
@marshalledgar It's amazing what makes it to be considered. Can't some bills just be thrown out for stupidity? @TrevorGoldley Let's just hope it doesn't get much farther. @missophiestik Hopefully, it won't pass! If it does, I imagine a lot of appeals and big revolts.
View more comments