[macintologist]

George and Martha Washington didn't get a government marriage

http://marriage.about.com/cs/marriag.../wisconsin.htm

If you've just set a date for your wedding, this can be an exciting time for the two of you! Don't let the marriage license laws of Wisconsin put a dent in your wedding plans.
Here's what you need to know and what documents to bring with you before you apply for a Wisconsin marriage license. We recommend getting this legal aspect of your wedding out of the way about a month before your wedding date.

Congratulations and much happiness as you begin your lifetime journey together!

Requirements may vary as each county in Wisconsin could have their own requirements.

ID Requirement:

You must bring your Social Security Number, show proof of residence, have a certified copy of your birth certificate if you are under the age of 30. Know your parents full names, mothers' maiden names. Make sure you have the date and place of your marriage ceremony and the name, address and phone number of the officiant.
Make sure you contact your County Clerk's office prior to leaving to get your marriage license. Some counties have different requirements as to required documents.

Residency Requirement:

One of you needs to have resided for at least 30 days in the Wisconsin county where you are applying. If you are from out-of-state, you must apply in the county where the ceremony will take place.
Previous Marriages:
In Wisconsin, you must show proof of divorce, death or annulment from your most recent marriage. You need to wait six months after a divorce before getting remarried. Bring a copy of judgment of divorce, legal annulment or death certificate from most recent marriage.

Waiting Period in Wisconsin:
There is a waiting period of six days in Wisconsin. If one or both of the parties is coming from out of state for the wedding, you can ask for a waiver of the waiting period when you apply for your license. The cost of the waiver varies from county to county. Some counties charge $10, making the total needed at time of application $70 in cash. Please check with the County Clerk's office for more information.

I can't believe that this has become mainstream. Why is the government in charge of deciding whether or not a marriage is valid. I have a better solution: how about individuals and couples or polyamorous groups create the terms of the marriage on their own, or get married through a religious organization, or however THEY CHOOSE not and this one-size-fits-all solution that the government forces on you.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Government is an association of people, and marriage is an important part of peoples' lives. You can't expect the law of the land to just pretend people don't get married; it's going to end up addressing the matter in some way or another. Or to put it another way, George and Martha probably didn't get to file a joint tax return either.

[ghporter]

I got married in Mississippi in 1980. I had the residence thing handled because I was stationed there. But since I wasn't quite 21 (remember, this was 1980) but I NEEDED WRITTEN, NOTARIZED, PARENTAL CONSENT TO GET MARRIED. If my wife had been under 21 it would have been even more stupid.

Wisconsin's laws are not any worse than most other place. All the quoted requirements do is make sure that both parties are properly identified (so nobody sneaks in as someone else), their lineage is recorded for historical purposes, and that they've been residents of the state long enough to make the state's work worthwhile. What's the "one size fits all" part you're concerned about?

[The Godfather]

Originally Posted by macintologist 

George and Martha Washington didn't get a government marriage

Applying for a Marriage License in Wisconsin


I can't believe that this has become mainstream. Why is the government in charge of deciding whether or not a marriage is valid. I have a better solution: how about individuals and couples or polyamorous groups create the terms of the marriage on their own, or get married through a religious organization, or however THEY CHOOSE not and this one-size-fits-all solution that the government forces on you.

Those are a set of brain-dead, piece-of-cake requirements. No reason why you should get special considerations from your government.

You may choose to live together, but don't come crying to your court if you want the tax breaks, legal rights, or the alimony benefits if your partner chooses to leave.

[Railroader]

"But America isn't based upon any religion!!!" /liberal whining]

"Yes it is" /centrist reality]

[BRussell]

There are a lot of myths, mostly invoked by the anti-gays, about traditional marriage. There's a book call Marriage: A History that goes into this stuff. In addition to the myth of government-approved marriage is the idea that marriage has always been considered the foundation of society, and that marriage has always been between one man and one woman (more common were polygamous marriages in ancient times). And girls could "consent" to marriage at age 7 100 years in some places in the US. Those were sure the good old days of marriage!

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

"But America isn't based upon any religion!!!" /liberal whining]

"Yes it is" /centrist reality]

Eh, it's as much of a myth that it was "based on" a religion than that it wasn't. Enlightenment, Deism, the Jefferson Bible, etc. etc.

[Chuckit]

Look, y'all, as long as there are tax benefits and legal differences to being married, the government is going to have a hand in it. If you don't care about those, then why complain about what the requirements are to get these things? If you want to have your 7-year-old cousin dress up in a suit and pronounce you man and wife and then you consider yourself married, the government isn't going to stop you — you just don't get the legal side of things.

[itai195]

I don't understand the nature of the OP's argument... If you want your marriage recognized by some entity - be it a religion or a government - you have to play by that entity's rules. If you don't care if it's recognized by that entity, then you don't have to play by those rules and you shouldn't expect to get the benefits of those who do.

The laws in CA seem to be much more lax. I don't recall needing anything more than a photo ID and a pulse.

[smacintush]

Marriage, in the beginning, was not intended to be anything "sacred". It was a legal arrangement between families and that's it. That's why back in the day polygamy and mistresses were so prevalent and accepted.

It wasn't until the 12th century that the idea of "romantic love" really took precedence in marriage.

So, yeah, the idea that the government shouldn't be imposing these types of rules is ridiculous. Marriage, even today, is JUST A LEGAL ARRANGEMENT and the government has the right to handle it however they want. (IMHO)

[macintologist]

The problem is that people have been so accustomed to government marriages that they feel if you don't get a government marriage, then it's not a real marriage. Could you imagine if a young couple told their families they weren't getting a marriage certificate? I bet the families would say **** like "well what's the point then?" or "well then how is it a real marriage?"

[The Godfather]

^ Less chance of a separation due to the pain of divorce (alimony responsibility).

[mac128k-1984]

I'm still not seeing the point in the OP's arguments against this.

As others have said if you want to take advantage of health care coverages, death benefits and tax savings then you have to play by their rules. The governement also stepped in for the rules because they don't want 13 year olds getting married which is one reason why they require IDs.

Because we live in a society that requires proof of who we are and proof of our relationships the government is going to have regulations. To be honest I don't see the point in whining about it.

You point to George and Martha Washington, well consider this, voter registration. I'm sure it was a lot easier for them to register then it is now. or just go back 100 years and consider the need for driver licenses. Life in the modern era has gotten complicated and its not a fair comparison to say ask why they didn't need it but we do.

[OreoCookie]

I don't agree with the OP: you still can get married the way, your religion tells you to. But you cannot get any of the government benefits, though. I don't see any problem with that.

If you just want to have the spiritual satisfaction of being married, then an involvement by the state is not necessary. But when you want to have rights as guaranteed by certain laws, then you have to play by the rules … 

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by BRussell 

Eh, it's as much of a myth that it was "based on" a religion than that it wasn't. Enlightenment, Deism, the Jefferson Bible, etc. etc.

There were more people than Jefferson who helped found our nation. Do a little reading in the USA's founding history. You'll learn a lot!

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

There were more people than Jefferson who helped found our nation. Do a little reading in the USA's founding history. You'll learn a lot!

And most of them were influenced heavily by Enlightenment philosophy, with several being Deists.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

And most of them were influenced heavily by Enlightenment philosophy, with several being Deists.

if by minority you mean "most", then you are correct. /sarcasm]

But the majority of them held theology degrees. From Christian universities.

And "several" is a weasel word along with "most".

[Monique]

It is like they are saying, are you sure you want to get married or not. It should be earsier than that to become a traditionalist.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Monique 

It is like they are saying, are you sure you want to get married or not. It should be earsier than that to become a traditionalist.

I disagree. It's far too easy for anyone to get married. It should be HARD because since it's almost trivial to get married far too few people take the institution or the commitment of marriage seriously. It was a major pain for ME to get married (see my first post in this thread) and we were already very serious and committed. If all it takes is dropping $20 on the clerk's desk and another $20 for the (insert your preferred officiator here) to do the ceremony, that sort of makes the whole thing just a lark in a lot of people's minds. Having to get a notarized NOTE FROM MY MOMMY was certainly enough to chase off someone less committed. Almost 27 years later, I am glad it wasn't so easy.

[Dakar²]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

I disagree. It's far too easy for anyone to get married.

You say that right to Elvis' face the next time you go through the drive-thru.