• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Govt free marriages

DZoolander

Persnickety Member
Apr 24, 2007
7,279
2,114
Far far away
✟127,634.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Even bringing that scripture back in it is in relation to breaking the law and fearing law enforcement response. There is NO law stating you have to have to file a marriage licence.

True. But according to the law of the land if you do not file the marriage licence, YOU ARE NOT MARRIED. And if you are not married, you are forbidden by christian doctrine from having sex. What kind of "marriage" is that?
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Where does it say in the Bible that two partners need to create a trust in order to have a Biblical marriage (a totally different beast altogether)?

It does not say that. But you cannot take that fact in a vacuum. The NT clearly tells us to obey the law of the land.

Rom 13.1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
2 Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

1 Pet 2.13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority,
14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

Yes, there is an exception where obeying that law causes us to break a scriptural command. The prime example of this is Acts 5:29:

But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men."

The council had commanded them to NOT PREACH in the name of Jesus but Our Lord said to Preach the gospel to all men. To obey the council would caus them to disobey the Lord's commission.

But in the issue of marriage, us getting a legal licence and filing it with the state is in no way a violation of scripture. Therefore the legal requirement of the licence stands. To oppose it is to resist God.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

dayhiker

Mature veteran
Sep 13, 2006
15,562
5,307
MA
✟232,558.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
I did the legal government marriage thing. I don't plan on doing that again.
Its part of our government that we are to live by our conscious. Even if we are on the jury in a trial there is jury nullification where we are to judge the law and if we find the law immoral we aren't to convict the person. Of course the legal people don't want us to know that.

So I make a commitment to any woman I'm spending time with. Tho most of them don't want to get married again either. The one that does want to marry me I couldn't live with for very long anyways. So I've told her I can't marry her.
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
It does not say that. But you cannot take that fact in a vacuum. The NT clearly tells us to obey the law of the land.

Rom 13.1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
2 Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

1 Pet 2.13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority,
14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

Yes, there is an exception where obeying that law causes us to break a scriptural command. The prime example of this is Acts 5:29:

But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men."

The council had commanded them to NOT PREACH in the name of Jesus but Our Lord said to Preach the gospel to all men. To obey the council would caus them to disobey the Lord's commission.

But in the issue of marriage, us getting a legal licence and filing it with the state is in no way a violation of scripture. Therefore the legal requirement of the licence stands. To oppose it is to resist God.
I respect that you follow Romans, 1Peter, Acts ... however, I do not consider any of those books canonical or divine.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I respect that you follow Romans, 1Peter, Acts ... however, I do not consider any of those books canonical or divine.

And at that point, we part ways ......
 
Upvote 0

sdmsanjose

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
3,774
405
Arizona
✟31,184.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
[FONT=&quot]One thing that I do not like is the government’s position when there is a divorce because of adultery. In many states the courts and attorneys will tell you that adultery makes no difference and some tell you to not even bring it up in court.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The state governments want to have the authority over you to tell you how your assists and custody of your children are going to be ruled upon but want to ignore taking into consideration the very sin that caused the divorce. That is authority without responsibility![/FONT]
 
Upvote 0

LinkH

Regular Member
Jun 19, 2006
8,602
671
✟58,853.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Did anyone here consider or do a govt free marriage. Is this becomming more and more accepted socially and in most churches?

Generally, I think of individualists who don't want a legal marriage and give a bunch of philosophical excuses as someone to avoid if you are looking for marriage. Not getting legally married is a way to make it easy to dissolve a relationship.

I understand why some men would go with this with the phenomenon of the 'walk away woman' in society now, which women filing most of the no-fault divorces. But I don't agree with it.

If there is a religious community, say some radical Amish, that don't want to file their marriages with the state for religious reasons, and they get married in their own churches, acknowledged by their own families and communities, I can respect that. I'm not going to say they are in adultery.

I used to live in Indonesia, which has government-registered marriages. But there are still remote tribes who don't have anything to do with the government who have wedding customs and fathers giving their daughters away in marriage, however they do it. I'm not going to say they aren't married. Marriage existed before the marriage license.

I think some states just sort of implicitly recognize marriages that are performed in church, but expect people to register.

One of the states proposed getting rid of marriage. I don't see registering with the state if it is a requirement as too onerous if are to respect the higher powers. Practically, it's good to file as married filing jointly on US tax returns. At the least, it saves duplicating paperwork and extra calculations.

I love my wife, and I love the Lord, and I wouldn't want to give anyone any excuse to say she was living in fornication with me and not truly married, and I wouldn't want us to be a bad witness.
 
Upvote 0

ValleyGal

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2012
5,775
1,823
✟129,255.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Female
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Divorced
Imo, the term "license" is not an accurate description of the document you register. A license is "permission" but the document is not about permission. It is not about meddling. It is not about the government being in bed with the couple.

The marriage "license" is a legal agreement, a contract based on the idea of covenant. When legal contracts are drawn up and signed, and witnessed, they then have to be registered with the courts to be granted legal status. When a contract is signed and not registered, it can be contested in court. When it is registered, it can't be contested, and there needs to be another legal agreement (with the original signees or by the court on behalf of a non-responsive signee) to override the original legal contract.

These are marriage and divorce contracts, and because marriage and divorce involve legal issues, they need to be registered. Registering not only legitimizes the marriage (and subsequent divorce, if there is one), it also provides information for vital statistics and census. Whether we like it or not, the government is part of our lives. It is part of everyone's lives, even remote villages that are not in contact with mainstream... every culture has their "government" system with laws, etc. Law in the Americas happens to be complex, but that does not mean it should be removed from our lives. God himself has established the laws and has created each of us in the very place where we should be, under the law where he wants us to be born and live. Government is involved from our birth - their involvement with the hospital where we are born, the registration of our birth name, etc. A marriage "license" is no different than the "registration" of our personhood as an infant, in that it provides us with certain rights and certain responsibilities.

God is a God of covenant, or an even higher form of contract, one that is not as easily dissolved as a contract. God's ideal for marriage is that it is covenantal rather than just contractual. This is why we have a "solemnity" in our vows and in the signing of the contract. I don't think this solemnity is stressed enough in our culture or in our pre-marriage counselling. God himself has set a precedent for us in establishing the solemnity of covenant, when he walked the blood path in his unilateral covenant with Israel. The relationship between God and Israel, and with Christ Jesus and the Church is what marriage is supposed to represent...starting with this solemn covenant. Although God's covenant with Israel was unilateral (meaning if the covenant was broken by either party, that God alone was responsible for providing the payment for its brokenness....which is why he sent Jesus as they atonement for Israel's breaking of the covenant), the marriage covenant has always been bilateral, making each fully, 100% responsible for the covenant and repairing any brokenness in it. This is congruent with the NT where it talks about not making sacrifice until all your relationships are reconciled, and where it talks about mutuality. In the OT, it was the fathers of the bride and groom who walked the blood path, to demonstrate their faith in their children and to demonstrate the solemnity (severity) of the covenant. Iow, blood would be spilled by the family if the covenant was broken, just as in the covenant of God. It was also all negotiated, contractual, and witnessed by the community. I'm not sure when census started, but when it did, people had to register along with their spouse. Over the centuries, this has evolved to what it is today - registering your marriage with the government for statistics and legitimization.

We are to obey the laws of the land, and the laws of the land grant certain rights and responsibilities when people are legally married. As has been stated, there are practical reasons to marry with the "license" (actually registration). But there are also spiritual reasons to do it....to use marriage as a platform for living out their Christian testimony to the relationship between Christ and the church.

Those who choose to live together and try to justify their choice, will not have to justify it to us... instead, they will have to stand before God one day and account for why the chose not to reflect the spiritual union of God and Israel / Jesus and the Church. Then God in all his holiness will decide whether or not you are justified. Personally, I am not willing to take that chance, and registering my marriage with American and Canadian government is not contrary to God's Word, so I would rather err on the side of holiness.

There is also the matter of the woman at the well. Jesus asked her to go and get her husband. She said she had no husband, to which Jesus replied that she had had five different husbands, and the man she was currently living with was not a husband. So living together is not the same as marriage, no matter how you try to justify it.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,522
16,853
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟772,040.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
[FONT=&quot]One thing that I do not like is the government’s position when there is a divorce because of adultery. In many states the courts and attorneys will tell you that adultery makes no difference and some tell you to not even bring it up in court.


Ah - decriminalization. Gotta love it ... (NOT!!!)

There still should be the death penalty for adulterers.
 
Upvote 0

ananda

Early Buddhist
May 6, 2011
14,757
2,123
Soujourner on Earth
✟193,871.00
Marital Status
Private
There still should be the death penalty for adulterers.
Then might as well blind yourself now: "But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" Mt 5:28
 
Upvote 0

DZoolander

Persnickety Member
Apr 24, 2007
7,279
2,114
Far far away
✟127,634.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Ah - decriminalization. Gotta love it ... (NOT!!!)

There still should be the death penalty for adulterers.

You've gotta be kidding me...lol Really?

I mean - I can totally see dumping/divorcing someone that cheated on you. But...wanting them dead?
 
Upvote 0
P

pittsflyer

Guest
The family law courts are completely corrupt and the marriage licence ties you to those courts. They enable graft greed and all sorts of other things opposed to God.

It does not say that. But you cannot take that fact in a vacuum. The NT clearly tells us to obey the law of the land.

Rom 13.1 Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
2 Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

1 Pet 2.13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority,
14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

Yes, there is an exception where obeying that law causes us to break a scriptural command. The prime example of this is Acts 5:29:

But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men."

The council had commanded them to NOT PREACH in the name of Jesus but Our Lord said to Preach the gospel to all men. To obey the council would caus them to disobey the Lord's commission.

But in the issue of marriage, us getting a legal licence and filing it with the state is in no way a violation of scripture. Therefore the legal requirement of the licence stands. To oppose it is to resist God.
 
Upvote 0
P

pittsflyer

Guest
Also a legal marriage only makes it hard for one party to walk away .... the MAN. Women can MORE easily walk away from a "marraige" than she can a relationship because she is almost assured to get custody and a bunch of money and women can more easily swing vine to vine where as the guy can end up alone and broke for a long time.

This system of corruption is by design and is tied to the marriage licence and the churches are willing to do nothing to combat it. I watch were organizations put their money and majority of churches are not putting it into fighting this corruption or making men whole so their opinions on the matter are worth about as much money as they put into it.
 
Upvote 0

ValleyGal

Well-Known Member
Dec 19, 2012
5,775
1,823
✟129,255.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Female
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Divorced
Also a legal marriage only makes it hard for one party to walk away .... the MAN. Women can MORE easily walk away from a "marraige" than she can a relationship because she is almost assured to get custody and a bunch of money and women can more easily swing vine to vine where as the guy can end up alone and broke for a long time.

This system of corruption is by design and is tied to the marriage licence and the churches are willing to do nothing to combat it. I watch were organizations put their money and majority of churches are not putting it into fighting this corruption or making men whole so their opinions on the matter are worth about as much money as they put into it.

Hmm. Men seem to walk away more easily, leaving wife to raise the kids, often alone. Men tend to remarry sooner after divorce, and more men remarry than women. It is easier for a man to date and he does not have to pay for a babysitter. Women will almost always take a nosedive in standard of living by divorcing, because men still make more than women (overall).

In Canada, the courts are not so gender-biased, and most of the time now will award joint custody as well as joint guardianship and the kids will spend equal time at each home. However, if there is one primary custodial parent, the other parent (male or female) will be obligated to pay 10% of their income per child to the custodial parent to meet their living expenses.

It seems to me that you are not here to engage in discussion of the issue so much as you are to bash "legal" marriage, possibly because you've been burned by divorce or know someone close to you who was.

The thing is, if you enter a marriage without the intent of ever divorcing, which is how it should be, tying yourself up with a corrupt court system should not worry you. If you marry the right person, and you know you have married the right person, then you should not be concerned about how corrupt divorce courts are because they will not apply to you. If you are serious about your commitment to the one you marry, and your integrity to keep your vows, then courts will have nothing to say about your marriage.
 
Upvote 0
P

pittsflyer

Guest
Hmm. Men seem to walk away more easily, leaving wife to raise the kids, often alone. Men tend to remarry sooner after divorce, and more men remarry than women. It is easier for a man to date and he does not have to pay for a babysitter. Women will almost always take a nosedive in standard of living by divorcing, because men still make more than women (overall).

In Canada, the courts are not so gender-biased, and most of the time now will award joint custody as well as joint guardianship and the kids will spend equal time at each home. However, if there is one primary custodial parent, the other parent (male or female) will be obligated to pay 10% of their income per child to the custodial parent to meet their living expenses.

It seems to me that you are not here to engage in discussion of the issue so much as you are to bash "legal" marriage, possibly because you've been burned by divorce or know someone close to you who was.

The thing is, if you enter a marriage without the intent of ever divorcing, which is how it should be, tying yourself up with a corrupt court system should not worry you. If you marry the right person, and you know you have married the right person, then you should not be concerned about how corrupt divorce courts are because they will not apply to you. If you are serious about your commitment to the one you marry, and your integrity to keep your vows, then courts will have nothing to say about your marriage.

This is the key and I have seen the opposite as you where the woman is able to remarry quickly. Unless the man is mr GQ doctor he is not going to be so quick to remarry. Women just have to still have some decent looks and they are good to go. I have also heard that Canada is starting to really hammer men just as much as the USA.

In the USA 70% of the divorces are initiated by women and 50% of marriages (or close to it) end in divorce so those stats cant be ignored.

Everyone would like to hope they married right but in all the divorces I have seen its always been the woman to walk out and she always does it while she still looks good.

Perhaps the tables turn as people get older, when women loose their looks and guys can still go out and use their money and influance to date up ..... maybe.

I just dont see the trends you are talking about, maybe I need to move lol.
 
Upvote 0