NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
A minor note (Score:2)
Re:A minor note (Score:2)
I will admit that it's a bit of an odd situation. "Legal" marriage in this country has nothing to do with religion (in theory), so the idea that only certain government workers and religious ministers can fill out the paperwork (the ceremony is superfluous from a legal standpoint) is a tad odd. It is, essentially, a contract. Boeing doesn't need a Reverend officiating over their contract signing with their union, though I confess that it would possibly make things more amusing :)
Re:A minor note (Score:1)
About the odd situation of law and marriage- a different perspective is found among the Quakers. We've [quaker.org] been marrying people without ministers for 300-odd years- because as a faith, we don't have ministers. (Or, more accurately, we don't have laity.) One of the community responsibilities is marrying people. Everybody at the ceremony signs the wedding certificate. Long before, during, and long after the wedding, a small committee (yes, that's actually the word we use) is responsible for meeting with the couple and helping with any concerns they (or the committee) might have about the marriage.
So it's an example of an intentional community taking care of what we think really matters to us and to God. As opposed to leaving it to the State.
I've been told that the English Quakers were the originators of marriage licences (as opposed to marriage banns) but I might be confusing that a bit.
And I'm happy to say that many quaker groups [quaker.org] have been marrying same-sex couples for over fifteen years.
-DA [coder.com]
Reply to This
Parent