![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Marriage/Civil Union/Match-Up/Whatever
Sep. 19th, 2007 11:58 amOK, the Maryland Supreme Court is full of gits and the lawyers arguing for idiocy were brilliant in how they framed their argument. I feel that the state (and country) should follow the old USSR method of union of people with some minor modifications. In the old USSR, you got a license (which had a waiting period to get it) and when you got it and signed it at the courthouse, the state recognized the union. You could then go to a church and have the union blessed by the church. 1 state 'marriage', 1 church 'marriage'.
If we had "Legal Bindings" performed by the state (and getting the license would be part of that. There would be a mandatory waiting period (as there already is for the license). Maybe have the signing of the license at the courthouse instead of in front of the clergy. It will slow things down at the courthouse because they would need to have the "Do you want to do this?" portion for each license. This "Legal Binding" would be open to any 2 legal adults who wish to bind themselves together in a legal fashion. The legally bound people would automatically inherit from each other (except when pre-contracts are entered into the court records at the time of the binding), be allowed to make medical decisions (unless a medical power of attorney is filed prior to the illness), etc.. Just as the current spouses have. It could be 1 man, 1 woman; 2 men; or 2 women. They would have to be legal adults (18 years old and not legally declared incompetent).
If they wanted to UnBind themselves, it would be again a process through the courts with certain things standard (any real property is sold and proceeds split 50-50) unless the parties agree otherwise (or have a pre-contract). This would include JOINT custody (and financial responsibility) of children ... if one party wants to have sole custody; they have to demonstrate to the court why they are fit and the other is not ... gender should NOT matter in those fights either.
If the couple wants to have a church wedding (and their church is amenable) they can. If a couple wants to have a church ceremony and NOT be legally bound; they can. If they want to be legally bound and NOT do the church thing; they can. If they want to have an open ceremony celebrating the Binding without clergy; no problems.
This will solve the "our church says a marriage is..." because a Legal Binding isn't a marriage. And if a church wants to marry a couple of 17 year olds; they can but the state won't recognize the Legal Binding until they file the paperwork after they are both 18.
If we had "Legal Bindings" performed by the state (and getting the license would be part of that. There would be a mandatory waiting period (as there already is for the license). Maybe have the signing of the license at the courthouse instead of in front of the clergy. It will slow things down at the courthouse because they would need to have the "Do you want to do this?" portion for each license. This "Legal Binding" would be open to any 2 legal adults who wish to bind themselves together in a legal fashion. The legally bound people would automatically inherit from each other (except when pre-contracts are entered into the court records at the time of the binding), be allowed to make medical decisions (unless a medical power of attorney is filed prior to the illness), etc.. Just as the current spouses have. It could be 1 man, 1 woman; 2 men; or 2 women. They would have to be legal adults (18 years old and not legally declared incompetent).
If they wanted to UnBind themselves, it would be again a process through the courts with certain things standard (any real property is sold and proceeds split 50-50) unless the parties agree otherwise (or have a pre-contract). This would include JOINT custody (and financial responsibility) of children ... if one party wants to have sole custody; they have to demonstrate to the court why they are fit and the other is not ... gender should NOT matter in those fights either.
If the couple wants to have a church wedding (and their church is amenable) they can. If a couple wants to have a church ceremony and NOT be legally bound; they can. If they want to be legally bound and NOT do the church thing; they can. If they want to have an open ceremony celebrating the Binding without clergy; no problems.
This will solve the "our church says a marriage is..." because a Legal Binding isn't a marriage. And if a church wants to marry a couple of 17 year olds; they can but the state won't recognize the Legal Binding until they file the paperwork after they are both 18.
