Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Religion
Related: About this forumFederal Court Knocks Out 1850s Indiana Law Forcing Non-Religious Couples to be Married by Clergy
Federal Court Knocks Out 1850s Indiana Law Forcing Non-Religious Couples to be Married by Clergy or Government Officials
Humanists have scored a big victory in Indiana after contesting the states 19th century law mandating marriages be performed only by clergy or public officials.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals sided with a legal challenge from the secular Center for Inquiry (CFI), which argued Indianas 1850s-era law was unconstitutional. The humanists claimed the First Amendment guarantees their right to have celebrants who do not believe in a deity to orchestrate wedding ceremonies.
The court has gotten this exactly right, Reba Boyd Wooden, a humanist and certified secular celebrant who was a plaintiff in the case, said in a prepared statement. Whether a person is atheist, agnostic, humanist, or simply doesnt want a religious wedding, this decision means they can now have these wonderful occasions solemnized by a celebrant who shares their life-stance.
Judge Frank Easterbrook noted in his opinion (pdf) that the law also discriminated against members of non-Western groups like Buddhists who dont worship a deity.
http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/federal-court-knocks-out-1850s-indiana-law-forcing-non-religious-couples-to-be-married-by-clergy-or-government-officials-140716?news=853696
Humanists have scored a big victory in Indiana after contesting the states 19th century law mandating marriages be performed only by clergy or public officials.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals sided with a legal challenge from the secular Center for Inquiry (CFI), which argued Indianas 1850s-era law was unconstitutional. The humanists claimed the First Amendment guarantees their right to have celebrants who do not believe in a deity to orchestrate wedding ceremonies.
The court has gotten this exactly right, Reba Boyd Wooden, a humanist and certified secular celebrant who was a plaintiff in the case, said in a prepared statement. Whether a person is atheist, agnostic, humanist, or simply doesnt want a religious wedding, this decision means they can now have these wonderful occasions solemnized by a celebrant who shares their life-stance.
Judge Frank Easterbrook noted in his opinion (pdf) that the law also discriminated against members of non-Western groups like Buddhists who dont worship a deity.
http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/federal-court-knocks-out-1850s-indiana-law-forcing-non-religious-couples-to-be-married-by-clergy-or-government-officials-140716?news=853696
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 825 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Federal Court Knocks Out 1850s Indiana Law Forcing Non-Religious Couples to be Married by Clergy (Original Post)
SecularMotion
Jul 2014
OP
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)1. K&R!
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)2. Technically, Notaries are 'public officials'. n/t
cbayer
(146,218 posts)3. Well done. I like the judge's reasoning on this.
This should be abolished in any states where it still exists.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)4. This issue dovetails nicely with this thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=143101
Add it to the list of shit I SHOULDN'T have to worry about. But do.
Add it to the list of shit I SHOULDN'T have to worry about. But do.