We were married by the friend who brought us together (Andy's old acquaintance from highschool). He was a minister in the Universal Life Church. The ceremony was co-officiated by him and a Methodist Minister, to represent the different spiritual beliefs my husband and I hold. However, the legal jazz was handled by our friend.
I know that in Indiana, you can be married by a Justice of the Peace, and the ceremony can be performed everywhere (not where the state official works). I think most states have a viable non-religious alternative?
This is all basically a side-note, b/c I have a serious personal objection to the concept of "legal" marriage myself. The government really has no business giving their blessing to some unions and not others. Marriage is a personal committment between two (or more) people and their higher power and/or community. The legal benefits of marriage can easily be accomplished in a legal contract. It seems to me that as we fight for acceptance of gay marriage, we leave behind equally valid claims like polyamory.
But if this is the way it must be, I'll fight for each one individually.
Re: Something that I wanted to comment on before
Date: 2003-10-14 09:57 am (UTC)I know that in Indiana, you can be married by a Justice of the Peace, and the ceremony can be performed everywhere (not where the state official works). I think most states have a viable non-religious alternative?
This is all basically a side-note, b/c I have a serious personal objection to the concept of "legal" marriage myself. The government really has no business giving their blessing to some unions and not others. Marriage is a personal committment between two (or more) people and their higher power and/or community. The legal benefits of marriage can easily be accomplished in a legal contract. It seems to me that as we fight for acceptance of gay marriage, we leave behind equally valid claims like polyamory.
But if this is the way it must be, I'll fight for each one individually.