Oklahoma Republican’s bill would block same-sex marriage by stopping ALL marriages

[unhappycamper]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/01/25/oklahoma-republicans-bill-would-block-same-sex-marriage-by-stopping-all-marriages/



Oklahoma Republican’s bill would block same-sex marriage by stopping ALL marriages
By David Ferguson
Saturday, January 25, 2014 12:17 EST

A Republican lawmaker in Oklahoma has proposed a controversial way to stopping same-sex marriages in the state. According to News9.com, state Rep. Mike Turner (R) has proposed scrapping marriage in the state altogether.

The lawmaker contends that it is the only way to keep same-sex marriage illegal in the state while still defending the U.S. Constitution.

“(My constituents are) willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all,” Turner told Channel 9.

Other lawmakers feel the same way, he said. They envision a state that doesn’t recognize any marriages at all.

[BlueMTexpat]

1. Well, there are quite a few

who certainly don't recognize marriage vows at all. Many of them are GOPers.

But scrapping "married" as a legal status, recognized by the state ... I think that he and anyone like him needs to think that through a bit more.

[TexasProgresive]

2. I've thought that government should get out of the matrimony business

A legal covenant agreement between 2 people to be filed at the local courthouse. If the couple wishes to "sanctify" their union they can do that in the church of their choice. What the state does should not be called marriage or matrimony. I would suggest civil union but that well seems to be poisoned by some. However if civil union is ubiquitous what would be the beef?

[LostOne4Ever]

4. Why?

Marriage pre-dates all world religions and in fact pre-dates written history. Further, its primary role throughout history has mainly been secular. It was mainly focused on property, inheritance, political arrangements, dowry, and sexual access.

About the only religious component added to it was a blessing by a deity. As a friend said to me, there is more religion involved in praying for rain in farming historically than in marriage.

Why should we have to concede marriage to the religion?

[FreeState]

5. +1

[JoeyT]

3. This is what happens when your job is to sell stupid and you dip into your own stash too often.

He's forgotten the whole purpose of denying LGBT people marriage rights isn't to defend marriage, but to prevent LGBT couples from having equal protection under the law. Our purpose is to ensure equal protection under the law, which is what getting rid of marriage entirely would accomplish.

He does do a rather good job of demonstrating the idea of "If I can't have it the way I want, no one can have it at all!" that Republicans, disgruntled spree killers, and most terrorists are fond of, but will rarely admit to.

There's also the possibility that he's a libertarian Republican, and wants the gay marriage debate over so he can go back to screaming for lower taxes. He certainly looks high. Hell, he looks positively baked. "This interview is over, I have to go buy six "Family Size" bags of Doritos and a crate of EZ Cheez."

[dickthegrouch]

6. I've been advocating precisely that

As the only logical equitable solution when States or the feds refuse to give us our constitution-guaranteed equal protection.

Even some here in DU said "No-one's coming after our (heterosexual) marriages"... Wrong, wrong, wrong. I'd have loved to see some fundie trying to explain why all State-conferred marriage benefits suddenly got erased.