From the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, it sounds as if there’s a pile of measures coming with regards to how the state interacts with private individuals in the arena of marriage.
County officials apparently count on taxing marriage as revenue, but that’s not going to stop proposals to just take the state out of it:
A Sioux Falls lawmaker who introduced legislation that would have ended state licensing of marriages says he will likely make another run at the issue next year.
and…
Instead of licensing, married couples would submit a certificate of marriage to their county register of deeds. The certificates would come from churches or those who officiated weddings.
and…
County officials originally opposed Haugaard’s bill, in part because they didn’t want to lose revenue.
and…
But an effort to end state licensing of marriages won’t be embraced by all groups that support traditional marriage. Dale Bartscher, the executive director of the Family Heritage Alliance, said he appreciated Haugaard’s thinking on the issue, but ultimately he said his group couldn’t support the bill.
What do you think? With the recognition of same-sex marriage, is it time for the state to just get out the marriage license business, and let counties serve as a filing agency?
And as noted by Representative Scott Craig in the article, does there need to be “protection provided to government employees – judges and clerks who declined to perform marriages or issue licenses based on First Amendment objections?”
We probably need to look at whether there is an easy way (or any way) to balance our First Amendment rights to freedom of religion against the 14th Amendment rights of equal protection of the law, on which the same-sex marriage rights are based. (Given the Supreme court’s position, we probably can’t get into a discussion on state’s rights anymore.)
Or is seeking both a fair and equitable balance between religion and rights just wishful thinking that’s never going to happen?
Well you can’t have a legislative session without going after the gay, lesbian and especially those darn transgenders. It just wouldn’t be South Dakota then. 🙂
“I wouldn’t want the Supreme Court to make a decision that would somehow advance my values on the country,” he said. It is still amazing how dumb and hypocritical “these people” are. If SCOTUS had ruled differently it WOULD have been advancing his values on the country and he would be cheering.
“he worries that it will erode First Amendment religious liberty protections.”– A red herring for the faithful or plain stupidity?
“judges and clerks who declined to perform marriages or issue licenses based on First Amendment objections.”– If someone refuses to do their tax payer paid job, they should be fired..
“”The Supreme Court made a mess,” he said.— No, it didn’t, unless you are a hate-mongering bigot.
———————–
Oh but, I do enjoy the sound of whining from “these people” on every issue,,,,,,it is long overdue…..JP
What if the counties/state simply stopped issuing marriage licenses (as proposed) AND stopped recognizing any & all marriage licenses.
In other words, marriage will no longer have any state-recognized legal consequences?
The lost revenue from marriage licenses would be made up in estate taxes where there is no “spousal” exemption because there are no more “spouses” ; or from surviving spousal benefit from the state retirement system?
.
This was mine:
What if the counties/state simply stopped issuing marriage licenses (as proposed) AND stopped recognizing any & all marriage licenses.
In other words, marriage will no longer have any state-recognized legal consequences?
The lost revenue from marriage licenses would be made up in estate taxes where there is no “spousal” exemption because there are no more “spouses” ; or from surviving spousal benefit from the state retirement system?
” it sounds as if there’s a pile of measures coming with regards to”–A “pile’ of what, sir?
Government should never have been involved with marriage in the first place if you believe marriage is a religious act and you believe in the constitution.
“After the Supreme Court’s historic 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, Southern politicians adopted a strategy that became known as “massive resistance.” It doomed the South to a losing battle against not just the court but also a majority of Americans.”–Washingtonpost—- Hey go for it.
How often are marriage licenses denied? If the state has just been rubber stamping them what’s the point?
I don’t think I am the only person in South Dakota who is tired of Dale Bartscher’s efforts to impose a theocracy on us. He doesn’t just oppose abortion and same sex marriage, he has advocated censorship of TV, movies, and video games. He also wants us to call unborn children “preborn” as if somebody else has already birthed them. Says the bad grammar draws attention to the pro-life issue. Bad grammar just makes us sound stupid.
Somehow he’s got all the Republicans thinking they can’t get elected without his support, so they go along with his ideas. Letting him give invocations at meetings and stuff. I’m sick of it, found out at a recent event I’m not alone.