It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
ACLU Sues to Stop Clergy From Performing Marriages in Nevada
Nevada has long been known as the easiest place in America to get a divorce — and a quick marriage. After a couple has had a “quickie” marriage and the marriage license has been mailed to them, the union is still not technically valid until either a clergyman or a justice of the peace in the state has performed a marriage ceremony and the officiant and the couple have signed the marriage license and it has been mailed to the proper government agency for validation.
All that this law requires is that the clergyman performing the wedding provide proof that he is affiliated with a church or religious organization. The legal role allowed by Nevada law to a man of the cloth, however, is too much for the American Civil Liberties Union, which has filed suit in Clark County, contending that allowing priests, ministers, and rabbis to marry people in Nevada violates the so-called separation of church and state prohibitions in the Constitution.
ACLU attorney Allen Lichtenstein argued that Judge Pro should strike the religious requirement from the statute. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, Raul Martinez and Michael Jacobson — both members of the American Humanist Association — claim they were denied certificates to perform marriages because they are not affiliated with a religious organization.
In his brief, Lichtenstein wrote that the state law in question does "advance religion by providing religiously affiliated individuals a certain degree of standing within the political community, while also sending a message to non-religiously affiliated individuals that they are outsiders from the political community, not worthy of privileges available to religious individuals.’’
In this ACLU case in Clark County, Nevada, what is being questioned is not the right of a humanist to have a marriage ceremony legally performed; in fact, the legal right to have a justice of the peace, who is not a religious official, perform the service seems to specifically embrace the rights of the godless to legally marry. What is being challenged is the right of two Catholics, two Jews, or two Protestants to have this milestone in life superintended by someone recognized by their faith.
Of course that's not what this is all about. What its really all about is the drive to destroy the institution of marriage and further weaken the most basic unit of human society
the American Civil Liberties Union, which has filed suit in Clark County, contending that allowing priests, ministers, and rabbis to marry people in Nevada violates the so-called separation of church and state prohibitions in the Constitution.
State laws allow a person to obtain a certificate of permission to solemnize marriages based on the fact that he or she has a religious affiliation, the suit says.
"Similarly-situated persons without such religious affiliation are specifically prohibited from obtaining such certificate. This requirement violates both the United States Constitution and the Nevada Constitution," the suit alleges.
A provision in state law regarding certificates of permission to perform marriages says in part that applications must: "Show the date of licensure, ordination or appointment of the minister or other person authorized to solemnize a marriage, and the name of the church or religious organization with which he is affiliated."
Originally posted by FortAnthem
reply to post by TurkeyTots
They believe that, by recognizing the clergy's role in the marriage ceremony, that the state is conferring some special power on them which is a "violation of separation of church and state."
They don't want clergy to be able to perform marriages in the state unless they get their way and make it so that anyone you pass on the street can perform marriages. They see blocking clergy from performing marriages as a step in deconstructing marriage as an institution and making it into something that just anybody could do.
Originally posted by FortAnthem
Clergy and secular officials authorized to perform marriages should have some type of training to counsel couples who want to get married to make sure they are entering into the marriage willingly, responsibly and with full knowledge of what they are getting into.
Letting anyone off the street perform marriages will make marriage less of a serious commitment in the eyes of the marrying couple and will further lead to its downfall as a legitimate institution.
Originally posted by BadNinja68
Originally posted by FortAnthem
reply to post by TurkeyTots
They believe that, by recognizing the clergy's role in the marriage ceremony, that the state is conferring some special power on them which is a "violation of separation of church and state."
They don't want clergy to be able to perform marriages in the state unless they get their way and make it so that anyone you pass on the street can perform marriages. They see blocking clergy from performing marriages as a step in deconstructing marriage as an institution and making it into something that just anybody could do.
you guys are reading this all wrong.
sorry to break it to you.
Nevada, unlike many states has a REQUIREMENT of clergy to legitimizer all marriages.
This means you aren't married, even with lisc., untill you go to "any clergyman" to get it authenticated.
They wish to eliminate the REQUIREMENT.
this is the issue.
If you wanna have a curch wedding, they will not stop you. nothing changes, except people who are NOT religeous, now can get married without having to ask a random clergyman to authenticate it.
Nevada's law is archaic.
Most states do not have that requirement.
I never went to a church when I was married in Florida.
Got lisc., and a notary pulic winessed our signatures. Very legal, very valid..just ask my divorce attorney.. no church or clergy needed.
The ACLU is simply saying the state cvannot REQUIRE you to go to a clergyman to have a legal marriage in the eyes of the law.
sheesh.. doesnt anyone READ?
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by FortAnthem
Your biased source has you completely confused... You should have done some research. No one is seeking to prevent clergy from performing marriages, they just want to be more inclusive and let the couple decide if they want clergy or non-clergy to perform the ceremony.
Basically, as the law is now, one has to PROVE they are religious before they can obtain a permit to conduct a marriage ceremony. Not the legal aspect, but the ceremony.
ACLU Sues over Religious Test to Conduct marriage.
State laws allow a person to obtain a certificate of permission to solemnize marriages based on the fact that he or she has a religious affiliation, the suit says.
"Similarly-situated persons without such religious affiliation are specifically prohibited from obtaining such certificate. This requirement violates both the United States Constitution and the Nevada Constitution," the suit alleges.
Originally posted by FortAnthem
I wonder if the Humanists should even be able to challenge the law in the manner in which they are attempting. The court should throw out their suit on the grounds that they lack standing on the grounds they are pursuing. Humanism has been recognized as a religion by the US Supreme Court and as such, they cannot claim to have been discriminated against due to their lack of religion.
Usually the state laws provide any recognized member of the clergy (such as a Priest, Minister, Rabbi, Imam, Cantor, Ethical Culture Leader, etc.), or a judge, a court clerk, and justices of the peace have authority to perform a marriage. However in some states even the clergy must be first certified or licensed.
Some states have laws that permit other persons to apply for authority to perform marriage ceremonies. For example, California law permits anyone to apply for permission to become a Deputy Commissioner of Marriages -- the grant of authority is valid for one day -- and thus officiate at the wedding of family or friends on that one day.