Alabama legislature moves to dispense with marriage licenses and solemnization

[RDKirk]

But if you were talking about subtle pressure that may not be a basic thing to detect.



Well in NM, the example we looked at earlier, it is still necessary to have a ceremony, just that it may be performed by a justice of the peace, etc. so not necessarily religious. But they still have a ceremony and consider it to be solemnizing. My point was, we don't solemnize other civil contracts that I am aware of.

A.The civil contract of marriage is entered into when solemnized as provided in Chapter 40,Article 1 NMSA 1978. As used in Chapter 40, Article 1 NMSA 1978, "solemnize" means to join in marriage before witnesses by means of a ceremony.

No, a ceremony is not required. You only need the people who are going to sign the certificate to show up and sign it.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You know, for the longest time, I've heard people claim "marriage belongs to God, not the state."

I never thought it'd be Alabama to prove them all wrong and put "God" out of the marriage business.

As a secular American who supports marriage equality, I accept their surrender.

 

[tall73]

No, a ceremony is not required. You only need the people who are going to sign the certificate to show up and sign it.

That is what I would be for. But we were discussing the NM statute, and it indicates it must be solemnized by a ceremony. Is there some other info from the statute I am missing?

 

[RDKirk]

That is what I would be for. But we were discussing the NM statute, and it indicates it must be solemnized by a ceremony. Is there some other info from the statute I am missing?

Those words have no legal meaning. If the groom alleges a week later that the marriage had not been "solemnized by a ceremony," will that annul the marriage?