Five Reasons Why Christians Should Not Obtain a "State Marriage License"

Great breakdown of why a "State Marriage License" is not biblical: Five Reasons Why Christians Should Not Obtain a State Marriage License

Some highlights:

From the State’s point of view, when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, but you are also marrying the State.

The most blatant declaration of this fact that I have ever found is a brochure entitled "With This Ring I Thee Wed." It is found in county courthouses across Ohio where people go to obtain their marriage licenses. It is published by the Ohio State Bar Association. The opening paragraph under the subtitle "Marriage Vows" states, "Actually, when you repeat your marriage vows you enter into a legal contract. There are three parties to that contract. 1.You; 2. Your husband or wife, as the case may be; and 3. the State of Ohio."

See, the State and the lawyers know that when you marry with a marriage license, you are not just marrying your spouse, you are marrying the State!

Sounds like adultery, no?

When you marry with a marriage license, you place yourself under a body of law which is immoral. By obtaining a marriage license, you place yourself under the jurisdiction of Family Court which is governed by unbiblical and immoral laws. Under these laws, you can divorce for any reason. Often, the courts side with the spouse who is in rebellion to God, and castigates the spouse who remains faithful by ordering him or her not to speak about the Bible or other matters of faith when present with the children.
 
I, too, am on team "let's quit doing marriage licenses." It has become abundantly clear that state issued marriage certificates have absolutely nothing to do with the Christian sacrament.

I was very pleased when I saw that the great Bible scholar Fr. Patrick Reardon has taken a stand on this; refusing to do any of the civil paperwork for couples whose weddings he officiates.
 

NoMoreTO

Ostrich
I always agreed with this belief. Catholic Church where I lives always provides it, 'render to Caesar'. It feels like if its a sacrament then it should belong to us, and not to Caesar.
 
I think Father Reardon means he won’t sign it himself, not that married couples shouldn’t have one. As far as I know, Orthodox priests only bless the marriage with the crowning ceremony once the couple is married in the secular legal sense. I don’t understand why, but that’s how the Church has always done it to my knowledge.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
Depending on your local, state and federal laws you may be causing yourself trouble down the line. You may also not be protecting yourself to the degree you think you are, while robbing yourself of legal protections you didn't know existed, particularly the right of spousal refusal to give testimony against her husband and the right to see your kids if things go south.

Be aware that state recognition of marriage is a two way street.
 

Handsome Creepy Eel

Owl
Gold Member
The phrase "Render to Caesar that which is Caesar's" seems pretty clear: unless the social authority is asking you to commit something evil or directly against your faith, there's no reason to not indulge it. Mind your own faith, which in the end is the only important thing.

Disrupting existing social order just for the sake of stating "I'm a Christian" seems wrong because it places an undue importance on the material world instead of the spiritual one. If you somehow ended up controlling this entire world and filling it with "Christian" lifestyle and customs, it would not affect anyone's personal salvation one iota. That's how you end up with bizzaro cults like Mormons, who, objectively speaking, live very pure and "Christian" lifestyles, yet are the very definition of modern Pharisees.
 

Parlay44

Peacock
Gold Member
So you can be like the Hacids. Claim 10 illegitimate children and reap the welfare money from the state all while renting your family home from your “husband” using state funded housing money for single mothers.
 

bucky

Ostrich
Leonard D Neubache said:
Depending on your local, state and federal laws you may be causing yourself trouble down the line. You may also not be protecting yourself to the degree you think you are, while robbing yourself of legal protections you didn't know existed, particularly the right of spousal refusal to give testimony against her husband and the right to see your kids if things go south.

Be aware that state recognition of marriage is a two way street.

Also, you probably have a common law marriage that the State will treat like any other marriage after living with her for a shockingly short amount of time anyway. I once found out that I'd already been legally married to my girlfriend under Ukrainian law for some time by the time we actually got that marriage license on paper. I think the period was something like three months of cohabitation.

If you have kids with her and live with her, you're probably legally married regardless of whether you have the paperwork.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
I think it's between one or two years in most Australian states regardless of whether children are involved.

The only saving grace for a lot of men is that women are oblivious to these laws and so bad breakups of LTR's don't generally result in the insane but legally viable result of splitting assets and even paying spousal support.
 

kel

Pelican
I won't comment on whether it's biblical or not, leaving that to the true theologians of the forum. But, in any event, a state marriage license is certainly not necessary, we can agree. Marriage is good for society by being a stable unit in which children are raised, but the state aspect of that hasn't contributed to that (if anything it's worked against it) for my entire life. Much more important is standing before your families, your community, and your god and saying "we are now a unit, we are going to make this work", the kind of accountability that should inspire in people.
 
Getting out of the state marriage business protects the (orthodox) church from being coerced by the state to marry people, things, or ideas that are not in line with its beliefs. I think this actually is the first, and best, reason.
 
bucky said:
Leonard D Neubache said:
Depending on your local, state and federal laws you may be causing yourself trouble down the line. You may also not be protecting yourself to the degree you think you are, while robbing yourself of legal protections you didn't know existed, particularly the right of spousal refusal to give testimony against her husband and the right to see your kids if things go south.

Be aware that state recognition of marriage is a two way street.

Also, you probably have a common law marriage that the State will treat like any other marriage after living with her for a shockingly short amount of time anyway. I once found out that I'd already been legally married to my girlfriend under Ukrainian law for some time by the time we actually got that marriage license on paper. I think the period was something like three months of cohabitation.

If you have kids with her and live with her, you're probably legally married regardless of whether you have the paperwork.

In the states if you write to your local probate court (depending on which state you live in) each month declaring you're not man+wife they'll recognize that. But you have to do it every 30 days. Dumb, I know.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
It's odd how things can work out. I can imagine a circumstance under a Godly nation where laws like this would be enacted in order to prevent people living in sin and then 100 years later in our satanic theocracies they're used and interpreted a whole other way.
 

DarkTriad

Ostrich
Gold Member
There are 2 places the government does a terrible job when they stick their nose in - religion and the bedroom. Modern marriage laws involve both...and do a exceptionally bad job. Zero reason for the gov't to be involved in marriage whatsoever nowadays. As mentioned above
So you can be like the Hacids. Claim 10 illegitimate children and reap the welfare money from the state all while renting your family home from your “husband” using state funded housing money for single mothers"
and the Islamic guys doing the same (with even more wives) are actually the smart ones. Why not scam a system that is set up to scam you?

The more guys drop out the system, the more they'll be forced to reform the laws to get men back on board. It's a real mindf*ck right now because for the first time in history, marriage laws actively de-stabilize families by offering perverse incentives to women to break up the family unit and leave your 14 year old daughter shacked up with some strange dude (the guy living in YOUR house) that stares at her too long when she's coming out of the shower. The modern gov't "marriage" is just a classic "bait and switch" scam, they're pretending to offer "grandpas marriage" and offering a one sided serf contract instead. You get a better shot at grandpas marriage with a purely religious ceremony. Until they reform the laws, we've got to follow the forward thinking model of our Islamic and Hasidic brethren and "starve the beast".
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
As noted before, there are risks and everyone gets to choose to what extent they want to premise their lives around dissidence against the global satanic theocracy.

I would argue that government does religion just fine, however it sucks when it's not your religion. People get confused because they think the default is libertarian when no such thing exists. State religion is inevitable. The only question is whose religion it will be.
 
Leonard D Neubache said:
Depending on your local, state and federal laws you may be causing yourself trouble down the line. You may also not be protecting yourself to the degree you think you are, while robbing yourself of legal protections you didn't know existed, particularly the right of spousal refusal to give testimony against her husband and the right to see your kids if things go south.

Be aware that state recognition of marriage is a two way street.

I thought if you can prove that they're your kids then you should be able to see them. It's not as easy as it would be if you were legally married, because you have to prove it, but I thought you could still do it. If the mom is demanding child support from you, of course that makes it very easy to prove that they're your kids.

My thinking is that there are some pitfalls to not getting a marriage license but on balance it may be better to forego the license.

Medical insurance for your family might be more expensive if you're not legally married. There might be fewer tax deductions. If the hospital is limiting visitation to spouses are they going to demand your marriage license?

If you want to marry a foreign woman and bring her to the U.S., I think you'll have to get some type of marriage license. It will just be too difficult and costly to accomplish that otherwise.

If you are American and you're marrying an American woman, it is probably better not to get a marriage license and go live in a state that does not recognize common-law marriage or palimony. If she later tries to leave you, she won't be able to get alimony, kick you out of your house, take assets that are in your name, or make you pay her debt. The increased cost of medical insurance and taxes is probably a lot less than the costs associated with divorce rape.

You can also prepare wills and advance medical directives, and buy life insurance. Those are ways to cherry pick some of the benefits of marriage.

Here is a list of States I found that do not recognize palimony or common-law marriage:
Alabama, Connecticut, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, Michigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Nebraska, West Virginia and Tennessee.
You may need to research this further to confirm this list is correct and see if there are loopholes.

I recently learned that there are approximately 3 states (Arizona, Arkansas, and Louisiana) that allow the husband and wife to opt contractually opt out of the no-fault divorce system when they get their marriage license. If the spouse wants a divorce, she has to prove adultery, a felony crime, or something bad like that. I don't know much about this though; I'm concerned there might be too many loopholes; living separately for a year might be considered grounds for divorce. At the moment it's probably better to forego the license.
 
If your wife ever gets seriously ill enough to where her survival is uncertain, a government-issued marriage certificate is a real blessing when dealing with insurance companies, hospitals, etc. When the nurse asks who are you and you respond "I'm her husband", you'll see the waters part. There is no ambiguity with a marriage license.
 

Max Roscoe

Kingfisher
I've never heard of someone needing to produce their marriage certificate in order to make medical decisions at a hospital. I mean, maybe if it was an end-of-life type scenario ie Terry Schiavo sure, but otherwise I'm pretty sure if you are the spouse and you inform medical staff of that, they will allow you in to see your wife whether or not you have a state issued marriage certificate.

The ridiculous "privacy but no security" position that insurance companies, phone companies, etc. take is annoying. I've found it's often better to slightly misrepresent who you are than to jump through their hoops (calling my Dad's private medicare company to find a local eye doctor they will approve of is a nightmare if I actually tell them I'm his son and he is not present). But you don't need to misrepresent anything at a hospital unless they ask you "sir may I see your marriage certificate?" Even then many churches provide one.
 
I would think just telling hospital staff, "I'm her husband," should be sufficient. If it's an end-of-the-life scenario like Terry Schiavo, the way to handle that is through a living will, advance medical directive, or power of attorney. You can authorize another individual to make decisions on your behalf when you're unconscious or if you become mentally incompetent. You shouldn't need a state marriage license to do that.

By the way I have removed Mississippi from my list of states that doesn't recognize common law marriage or palimony. I found a court decision where they basically allowed palimony.
 
Top