Comments on: Unwedding day http://blogs.mddailyrecord.com/ontherecord/2007/10/30/unwedding-day/ Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:44:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Bruce Godfrey http://blogs.mddailyrecord.com/ontherecord/2007/10/30/unwedding-day/#comment-102 Bruce Godfrey Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:52:00 +0000 http://blogs.mddailyrecord.com/ontherecord/2007/10/30/unwedding-day/#comment-102 The very preservation of religious ministers as exclusive conductors of marriage ceremonies strikes me as offensive to constitutional values if not the constitution itself. Either a couple should be free to register their marriage by declaration at the courthouse - regardless of whether a minister or ceremony was ever involved or would be involved the next day, etc. - or any notary should be able to certify the ceremony with signatures from the happy couple. <br/><br/>Leave religious ceremonies to religious institutions, and get the government absolutely out of the business. The state has no legitimate business in this area, none whatsoever. It is positively medieval. The very preservation of religious ministers as exclusive conductors of marriage ceremonies strikes me as offensive to constitutional values if not the constitution itself. Either a couple should be free to register their marriage by declaration at the courthouse - regardless of whether a minister or ceremony was ever involved or would be involved the next day, etc. - or any notary should be able to certify the ceremony with signatures from the happy couple.

Leave religious ceremonies to religious institutions, and get the government absolutely out of the business. The state has no legitimate business in this area, none whatsoever. It is positively medieval.

]]> By: Francis Smith, Special Publications Assistant Editor http://blogs.mddailyrecord.com/ontherecord/2007/10/30/unwedding-day/#comment-101 Francis Smith, Special Publications Assistant Editor Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:22:00 +0000 http://blogs.mddailyrecord.com/ontherecord/2007/10/30/unwedding-day/#comment-101 This ruling seems like a tremendous waste of judicial time. As an online ordainee who has presided over a wedding with 100-plus people in attendance, I think that decision only belongs in the hands of a bride and groom. It's what's in the hearts of the two people being wed that counts; not what kind of congregational clout the clergy has. This ruling seems like a tremendous waste of judicial time. As an online ordainee who has presided over a wedding with 100-plus people in attendance, I think that decision only belongs in the hands of a bride and groom. It’s what’s in the hearts of the two people being wed that counts; not what kind of congregational clout the clergy has.

]]> By: Jeff http://blogs.mddailyrecord.com/ontherecord/2007/10/30/unwedding-day/#comment-100 Jeff Wed, 31 Oct 2007 14:11:00 +0000 http://blogs.mddailyrecord.com/ontherecord/2007/10/30/unwedding-day/#comment-100 Leaving aside the entirely inappropriate intrusion of the state into religion and personal liberty, the potentially broader question might be whether a person has to have a congregation to be considered a legitimate pastor. That's a business matter. <br/>When it comes to something as personal as who we marry and how we marry them, I say we get to tell the state how we want to do it, not the other way around. Leaving aside the entirely inappropriate intrusion of the state into religion and personal liberty, the potentially broader question might be whether a person has to have a congregation to be considered a legitimate pastor. That’s a business matter.
When it comes to something as personal as who we marry and how we marry them, I say we get to tell the state how we want to do it, not the other way around.

]]>