Sculpture donated in Hamilton
Badin vs. Coldwater
Ross vs. Winton Woods
Home > Blogs > Ohio politics > Archives > 2009 > March > 25 > Entry
Would you say ‘I Do’ with a politician presiding?
State lawmakers are considering giving themselves the power to perform civil marriage ceremonies anywhere in Ohio, according to a bill pending in the House.
Current law authorizes ordained or licensed ministers, religious societies, judges, mayors and the superintendent of the State School for the Deaf to perform civil marriage ceremonies between a man and woman.
Lawmakers would be required to donate any fees collected for performing the ceremony to charity.
State Rep. Tom Letson, D-Warren, who is sponsoring the bill, said he has performed about a dozen weddings as an acting judge in Trumbull County.
“It was just kind of fun because no one is mad at each other at a wedding,” he said. “It is a very good feeling to be in a legal setting where no one is mad at each other.”
Two other states — California and Rhode Island — permit all their state lawmakers to perform weddings, he said.
Permalink | Comments (10) | Post your comment |
Comments
By ghd
March 25, 2009 3:33 PM | Link to this
Many years ago, we almost opted to have then Mayor Turner marry us at his office in Dayton. There were “issues” with family members that may have caused some problems so, an option was open to have a civil ceremony officiated by the mayor. But, everything worked out for a church wedding. Since anyone can go online and get “ordained” via email, why not let elected officials perform marriages?By ben
March 25, 2009 3:25 PM | Link to this
I think it’s a great idea. As someone who’s about to get married and isn’t a member of any church it was a real pain to try to find an officiant for the ceremony. I’m lucky that I have a relative who is ordained who is willing to do it, but for others in my situation, if we could just get any elected official to do it, rather than just the town clerk or judge, that would make things a whole lot easier.By bill
March 25, 2009 1:53 PM | Link to this
Hey Rob-Nice try, but the article says the lawmakers are considering giving THEMSELVES…I don’t see where any group is pushing for this. Do me a favor Rob…name the group or groups who sponsored or suggested the idea…this is not part of the Gay Agenda!By Pharrell
March 25, 2009 1:48 PM | Link to this
Sure, why not? When I got married we talked with several churches that wouldn’t work with us because gawd forbid my girlfriend and I lived together. I’d be perfectly happy going to a mayor or somesuch to perform the ceremony. And while I think Rob is being paranoid about a gay marriage agenda (where does it say this is being considered because current officiants can’t handle the load?) I think anything that advances the cause of gay marriage is all right in my book.By righton
March 25, 2009 1:02 PM | Link to this
You guys are the best. Ditto to all your comments :-DBy Lori
March 25, 2009 12:24 PM | Link to this
NO WAY!!!!! What else do they want to give themselves the power to do?By Rob
March 25, 2009 12:13 PM | Link to this
Stupid and weak attempt to push Gay Marriage. The system we have in place today clearly CAN handle the load. Why invoke a change unless there is a hidden agenda? Want to really shake things up? Revoke the legal right of ordained ministers to perform unions…now we’re talking. Let the State do “state” things…according to the State, I was married when I got the license signed. According to me, I was married once the Priest said “I present to you…” Big difference there for those who can see it.By April
March 25, 2009 12:01 PM | Link to this
Give the money to charity? Heck, for the most part they can’t even pay their taxes legitimately!By Karen
March 25, 2009 11:54 AM | Link to this
Would they be able to grant divorces too?By flipper
March 25, 2009 11:34 AM | Link to this
Stay out of it. They can’t even do their job now.