The Minnesota legislature is considering passing a law allowing for full marriage equality. It's made me think of my own marriage to Liz on May 20, 2000 at Twin Cities Friends Meeting, and the very large and beautiful certificate we have on our wall. And it made me ask a question of TCFM, what, if any, accommodation will TCFM make for couples whose marriage they took under their care before it became legal to file for a marriage licence?

TCFM is taking the question under consideration and I'm wondering what, if anything, other Meetings have or have not done for couples who now can get married, and who they married before it became legal to do so.

TCFM is talking about having some separate process and are considering the legal requirements and ramifications of signing the MN marriage licence. 

Minnesota requires that you file for a license at least five days but no more than six months before your wedding, and the signers agree to these terms by their signature. (In MN, 6 Quakers, who are members of a meeting=1 minister). There are many lawyers at TCFM and I'm pretty certain there will be much hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth about what's legal to do or not.

I'm just wondering, where's God's law in all of this? What truth have you found in your process?

Views: 143

Comment by Stephanie Stuckwisch on 5th mo. 18, 2013 at 3:13pm

Nearly 20 years ago, my meeting decided to take marriages under our care based on the relationship itself and not on the genders involved. This also meant that we ceased to sign the legal certificated available to opposite sex couples.

I'm not sure what the legal implications are for us now that Washington State recognizes same sex marriages.

We have had 2 couples who were legally marriage prior to joining the meeting. They requested and we took both relationships under our care following a clearness process.

Perhaps the same could be done in your meeting only in reverse? A celebration of a couple's years together as well as the meetings re-commitment to care of the marriage?

Comment

You need to be a member of QuakerQuaker to add comments!

Join QuakerQuaker

Support Us

Did you know that QuakerQuaker is 100% reader supported? If you think this kind of outreach and conversation is important, please support it with a monthly subscription or one-time gift.


You can also make a one-time donation.

Latest Activity

William F Rushby liked William F Rushby's discussion Recapturing Initiative for Conservative Friends
6th day (Fri)
Sandi Was Here updated their profile
4th day (Wed)
William F Rushby replied to William F Rushby's discussion 'Recapturing Initiative for Conservative Friends'
"In its more vigorous days, the Rockingham Meeting undertook a program of intervisitation with other…"
3rd day (Tue)
Keith Saylor commented on Keith Saylor's blog post 'Online Version of William Rogers 1680 text "The Christian Quaker..."'
"Published William Shewen's "TREATISE Concerning Evil Thoughts and…"
3rd day (Tue)
William F Rushby replied to William F Rushby's discussion 'Recapturing Initiative for Conservative Friends'
"The paper I just posted revises one I wrote 20 years ago.  I would like to add one more…"
8th month 2
William F Rushby posted a discussion

Recapturing Initiative for Conservative Friends

I have been involved with Conservative Friends, sometimes more and sometimes less, for 50 years. …See More
8th month 2
Marcia P Roberts commented on Marcia P Roberts's blog post 'No respector of persons'
"William, Keith: Thank you for your words, which strengthen me and comfort me in this struggle. In…"
7th month 28
Keith Saylor commented on Marcia P Roberts's blog post 'No respector of persons'
"Marcia, I share your struggle with the power of the reflective process in matters of human…"
7th month 28

© 2020   Created by QuakerQuaker.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service