|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
 Posted - 09/26/2007 : 09:21:58
|
I recently came across this article about marriages in PA being invalidated because the person who officiated the ceremony got their ordination online through the Universal Life Church: http://www.nbc10.com/news/14118601/detail.html?subid=10101521
The article doesn't have enough clear info, so I called the Philadelphia Counter Clerk of Courts, got their lawyer, and found out exacly what law states the requirements for wedding officiates. It is Title 23 of PA Consolidated Statutes Section 1503 http://members.aol.com/StatutesPA/23.Cp.15.html, which simply states: "A minister, priest or rabbi of any regularly established church or congregation." is qualified to officiate weddings.
That is all it says. Is this wildly open to interpretation or what??? So the lawyer told me that Universal Life Church ministers don't count (which is why thousands of marriages in PA may be invalid!!!) but what about the Humanist Society? I used to be a Celebrant through them, and at that time I also met with the Humanist Association of Greater Philadelphia - which would fit the bill for a "congregation" (I guess). But currently I'm certified through the Church of Spiritual Humanism which, like the Universal Life Church, ordained anyone for free online. So I still have a congregation, but the institution through which I have my certification is not valid?
This seems like religious discrimination (again the nonreligious, minority, and alternative religions). What can't secular or tiny religious minority folks get married by someone with an ordination through the Universal Life Church? We aren't fucking second class citizens.
So the question is, how do I go about challenging it?
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 09:36:44 [Permalink]
|
| Frankly, ULC is a joke. I am a "Ordained" minister from ULC. All it took was filling out my name and address. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
 |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 09:40:34 [Permalink]
|
The couples don't get notified, so who would ever know that they're not married? Interesting.
I remember I had a friend in Pennsylvania wanted me to perform her wedding ceremony. I couldn't make it for a lot of reasons. I looked up the laws in PA. I told her there was something in PA that let couples marry themselves, and that she should ask about that. I think she may have done it that way. I don't know, I lost track of her after that, and I think she was divorced shortly thereafter. Interesting if that's legal, and the minister thing isn't. I'll try to find that again.
http://pennfamilylaw.com/2007/08/04/great-wedding-but-was-it-legal/
This article says that if the couples consider their marriage valid, then judges will probably let it slide.
I've done three weddings in Ohio and my wife did one, so I hope they don't challenge the ULC thing. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 09:44:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
Frankly, ULC is a joke. I am a "Ordained" minister from ULC. All it took was filling out my name and address.
|
I think it's a useful thing for people who want to have churches which are not mainstream. I wouldn't call it a joke. For a while, we seriously considered formally having a church with a group of us that got together frequently, but I soon realized that the supernatural itself is a bad joke. In fact, I think most of us in the group were ordained.
I agree with Marf. I don't think they're any less valid than anyone else formally trained by a church to spread formal crap instead of informal crap. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 09/26/2007 09:45:06 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 09:47:58 [Permalink]
|
You, as an unharmed party, don't have standing to challenge the law in court, so it seems that there are two things you can do:
1) Lobby your state representatives to change the law. Clearly, Pennsylvania has an interest in preventing just anybody from officiating at a wedding, so some standard will be required. "Any regularly established church or congregation" is, obviously, very vague, but what about replacing it with a minimum number of adherents or congregants? Or, perhaps the law could change so that the state hands out "Officiator's Licenses," so they can check up on you and verify how serious you are. I dunno, I'm just brainstorming, here.
2) Contact some of the unmarried married people and get them in contact with the local ACLU. Your real task in that would be to convince everyone that a lawsuit would be worth the time and expense - that the law is actually (legally) discriminatory against smaller religions.
But the primary question that you're going to have to answer in either case is this: what is it about ordination that is special? In other words, why should you be allowed to officiate a wedding, and me not? You're certainly not going to argue (as a preist would) that you have a mandate from God to marry people. And what's to prevent me from ordaining myself as a minister of the brand-new First Church of Dave, and by doing so, should I suddenly get to officiate at weddings? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 09:48:21 [Permalink]
|
Yeah, it's called a "self-uniting marriage license." Evidently there is some controversy with that.
http://marriage.about.com/cs/marriagelicenses/p/pennsylvania.htm |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 09/26/2007 09:48:59 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 10:02:10 [Permalink]
|
And what's to prevent me from ordaining myself as a minister of the brand-new First Church of Dave, and by doing so, should I suddenly get to officiate at weddings?
|
No, just circumcisions. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 11:28:30 [Permalink]
|
| and dangerously negligent exorcisims of 4 year olds! |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 12:03:29 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by BigPapaSmurf
and dangerously negligent exorcisims of 4 year olds!
|
As long as you don't take nude pictures of them. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 12:29:10 [Permalink]
|
Here's a clause from Virginia's laws.
| No marriage solemnized under a license issued in this Commonwealth by any person professing to be authorized to solemnize the same shall be deemed or adjudged to be void, nor shall the validity thereof be in any way affected on account of any want of authority in such person, or any defect, omission or imperfection in such license, if the marriage be in all other respects lawful, and be consummated with a full belief on the part of the persons so married, or either of them, that they have been lawfully joined in marriage. |
http://tinyurl.com/yreto2 |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
| Edited by - Gorgo on 09/26/2007 12:31:00 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 12:35:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
You, as an unharmed party, |
Wouldn't she be a harmed party if she can't perform weddings? |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 13:10:45 [Permalink]
|
In my opinion, marriage licenses issued by the state or local government should have a spot for those officiating at a wedding ceremony to sign, but that should be purely optional, a nicety for reasons of cultural tradition. Let religious organizations harbor whatever internal thoughts they like to about validity.
Marriage itself should be a mere licensing function as far as the state is concerned. The state should not get involved with deciding who, if anyone, should officiate. Yes, the Universal Life Church is a joke, but just a smaller gag than is, say, the Catholic Church. Both arbitrarily give priestly (in other words, meaningless) status to individuals.
And of course, adults should be able to marry, regardless of gender.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 14:51:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Gorgo
Wouldn't she be a harmed party if she can't perform weddings? |
Good question. Actually, looking further at the link marf provided, it says,§ 1503. Persons qualified to solemnize marriages.
...
(b) Religious organizations.--Every religious society, religious institution or religious organization in this Commonwealth may join persons together in marriage when at least one of the persons is a member of the society, institution or organization, according to the rules and customs of the society, institution or organization. The "minister, priest or rabbi of any regularly established church or congregation" bit is from the "general rule," section 1503(a)(6). 1503(b) seems to say that so long as marf or at least one of the people she's officiating for are part of some religious group (including a secular humanist group), she'd be fine so long as she followed the group's customs.
Seems to me now that what was said in the article was simply wrong regarding the 1503(a) rules being the only game in town (because 1503(b) is another choice). And it also seems to me that what the state wants to avoid is John Doe, ordained online by Sam's House of Ordainment, performing a marriage for two other not-affiliated-with-any-cohesive-group people.
Plus, because section 1502 provides a way for two people to get married without an ordained anything officiating, it seems that marf can perform a ceremony at anyone's wedding she wants to, so long as she lays off the "by the power vested in me" line. In other words, a couple can get certified to be married to each other without any need for any official present to solemnize, but have marf do her thing anyway - because they want her to.
Anyway, society has an interest in ensuring that people don't get married frivilously or otherwise for the wrong reasons. By setting forth the standards they have on who can or cannot perform weddings, the state intends to filter out those who won't take things seriously and thus cause a burden to the state in terms of costly divorces, improperly applied parental rights, illegal immigration, etc. Society as a whole has an interest in seeing that marriage, either civil or religious, isn't entered into on a whim, because other laws recognize the distinction between married and unmarried people. (Which is why I've got to disagree with Half's hands-off views.)
With that in mind, and because 1502 and 1503(b) give marf options, I think it would be an steeply uphill battle to claim that marf is having her First Amendment right to free exercise trampled by section 1503(a)(6) of the law. And if it's not a 1st Amendment issue, then no, marf's not being harmed (in a legal sense, because performing weddings isn't her occupation, either).
But, I am not a lawyer. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 17:05:39 [Permalink]
|
It seems as though this is about establishing who really has a religion, and who doesn't. Why is the state involved at all in deciding who a real minister is, which is what they're saying. They're saying that ULC ministers are not real ministers regardless of what they do.
I have to say that I think the state should only be involved in the legal aspects of marriage, and not the religious aspects. Go to the state to buy your license and get a blood test or whatever, and the state would recognize you as married. Then, if you want rituals and religious crap then add it, but you wouldn't need it as far as the law is concerned.
I think I'd call the ULC and see if anyone there has an opinion or any information on anyone that is trying to fight it. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 17:06:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Anyway, society has an interest in ensuring that people don't get married frivilously or otherwise for the wrong reasons. By setting forth the standards they have on who can or cannot perform weddings, the state intends to filter out those who won't take things seriously and thus cause a burden to the state in terms of costly divorces, improperly applied parental rights, illegal immigration, etc. Society as a whole has an interest in seeing that marriage, either civil or religious, isn't entered into on a whim, because other laws recognize the distinction between married and unmarried people. (Which is why I've got to disagree with Half's hands-off views.)
|
Mine's not a position of the state having taking a "hands-off" approach to marriage qualiifications (except for gender discrimination), Dave, just hands-off on deciding who can celebrate the wedding for the couple.
In many places, like my own state of California, you don't need a minister, anyway, just a judge or court-appointed official will do. The state can have any reasonable laws for qualifying people to be licensed. But they have no business picking, choosing, or licensing priests of "qualified" religions to do the honors. I see no way that any religious official would realistically contribute to people marrying for whatever the state thinks are the right reasons. Many if not most preachers are simply going to look at the marriage license to determine whether he or she should preform the ceremony, then take the fee.
I hope you have no problem officiating, Marf!
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 09/26/2007 17:30:11 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 17:08:34 [Permalink]
|
I didn't realize that Kirby and Lida Hensley, the founders of the ULC are now both dead.
http://ulchq.com/ |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Discrimination Against Alternative Ministers in PA
