My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2004

« We're Here, We're Queer, And We Ain't Going Nowhere! | Main | Quote of the Day »

Comments

brenda

Agreed! In Holland it's done this way. The church doesn't recognize the civil ceremony, the state doesn't recognize the church one. The churches shouldn't be allowed to dictate the law.

Kathy

You work for the California judicial system. By the California Laws of Evidence (and every other state I believe), a marriage recorded in a family bible will hold up in court as well as a marriage license.

From the California Laws of Evidence:

1312. Evidence of entries in family Bibles or other family books or charts, engravings on rings, family portraits, engravings on urns, crypts, or tombstones, and the like, is not made inadmissible by the hearsay rule when offered to prove the birth, marriage, divorce, death, parent and child relationship, race, ancestry, relationship by blood or marriage, or other similar fact of the family history of a member of the family by blood or marriage.

You might also be interested in these articles (typepad totally screws up links these days but I'll try anyway):

Taking Marriage Private: http://nytimes.com/2007/11/26/opinion/26coontz.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

5 Reasons Why Christians Should Not Obtain a State Marriage License:

http://mercyseat.net/BROCHURES/marriagelicense.htm

Houston

Interesting articles. I wouldn't try to go into probate court with a Bible these days. It's like taking a knife to a gun fight. While the validity of marriage may be assumed by a court, it is rebuttable. Also, California no longer recognizes common law marriages.

fragile industries

As usual, sugah, you have an uncommon brand of common sense. I love this idea. It eliminates the issue entirely, has historical precedent, and observes the church and state delineation perfectly.

Because it is so workable and logical, no legistlature will ever enact it. But we can dream ...

The comments to this entry are closed.