Marriage Equality Hearing

Thanks for Posting (0.00 / 0)

Would you like to comment on why you support a separation of religious and civil marriage? Why do you support this bill over the other bills dealing with this issue?

You link to New Hampshire Freedom to Marry, and this post is almost identical to a NHFTM email sent recently.  Are you posting for NHFTM?  Its ok if you are, its just better if you disclose such things in your posts.

---

by: Nicholas Gunn @ Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 14:43:32 PM CST

civil vs. religious (4.00 / 1)

A religious marriage is recognized by a given congregation as being a marriage within the tenets of their faith.  Such marriages are not recognized by the state unless they conform to the requirements of a civil marriage.

A civil marriage is recognized by the state and may not be recognized by a given congregation.  It is governed by state law and must be performed by someone authorized by the state (a Justice of the Peace or a state approved clergy person).

Most religious marriages are also civil marriages because the ceremony itself is purely religious in nature, but when the clergy signs the marriage license, they are acting as a representative of the state, not as a clergy person.

Under the 1st amendment, the state should not be regulating religious ceremonies, such as religious marriages, but can regulate civil marriages.  The state provides two methods for someone to be able to officiate a civil marriage.  Either you can register as a Justice of the Peace, or, if you are a minister of some kind, you can have the state recognize you as such.

The problem with the second part is that it puts the state in the position of deciding which religions and ministers are considered to be "valid" for state purposes and which are not.

It also provides an opening for the state to regulate all marriages performed by clergy.  For example, one bill currently in the house would make it illegal for ministers to perform religious marriage ceremonies in cases where the state would not issue a license (for example, with gay couples).

While this is clearly unconstitutional, many religious people are concerned that, if the state begins to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, that their church will be forced to perform marriage ceremonies for them.  This would clearly be unconstitutional and no one supports this, but the fears are out there.

To try to address these fears, one idea that is floating around the statehouse would be to require anyone who wants to act as as representative of the state to register as a justice of the peace.  Thus, clergy would have to register as a Justice of the Peace (currently they register as clergy) if they want to perform civil, state-recognized marriages, but it removes the state from being in the position of deciding who is a legitimate clergy person.

The bill being heard has a specific statement that churches can not be forced to perform marriages that they disapprove of.  That's the way it's always been, but making a clear statement is better.

Why support this bill?  It's the only bill that gives gays and lesbians full equality and participation under state law without creating a separate, segregated set of laws just for gays.

Finally, I don't think that the poster was representing NHFTM, just posting the Action Alert.

---

by: brianrater @ Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 11:32:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Very Interesting (0.00 / 0)

Sorry I did not respond sooner, I had a busy weekend.  Yes, you are right I was not posting as a representitive oF NHFTM, but I did have their permission to post their email and I'm sorry for not making that clear. (I"m a newbie here)

I certainly was enlightened by your description of civil vs. religious marriage. 

http://www.equalitypress.com/

---

by: EqualityPress @ Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 21:09:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No Problem (0.00 / 0)

I just recognized the email and thought I'd ask about it.

I hope I didn't come off as too abrasive.

---

by: Nicholas Gunn @ Tue Mar 13, 2007 at 10:12:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

just in case there's confusion (0.00 / 0)

The hearing is now set for WEDNESDAY, March 14. The rally is from 12 - 1 in front of the State House, and the hearing begins at 1, in Rep's Hall.

The anti-gay forces are likely to be out in full force. Anyone who is in favor of civil marriage and civil rights for our gay brethren should be there if they can.


NH Kucinich Campaign

---

by: susanb @ Sat Mar 10, 2007 at 16:03:19 PM CST