Talk:Self-uniting marriage

PA status

Does anyone know how the recent changes to the marriage laws in PA have affected this category of marriage? It's my understanding that PA has either removed this category, or significantly reduced it's availability but I'm not certain about that. --Ahc (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Self-uniting marriage licenses for members of religious faiths without clergy (Quakers, etc.) in PA is ongoing and not in dispute, but their issuance for secular applicants is embroiled in controversy. The solicitor for the statewide Association of Registers of Wills and Clerks of Orphans Court (the professional organization for those who issue marriage licenses in PA) has advised member registers/clerks that the state's abolition of common law marriage in 2005 also affects self-uniting marriage. This is a very controversial position, however, and appears motivated by fears of same-sex marriage. The solicitor, David Cleaver, been quoted as saying:

"You can self-unite two men or two women, that's where they're going," Cleaver said. "They're going two places: They're looking to legitimize gay marriage and they're looking to re-legitimize common law marriage."

But the judge in the September 2007 federal lawsuit against PA's Allegheny County in her order (.pdf) that PA "permits as a matter of statute the issuance of self-uniting marriage licenses" regardless whether whether the marriage is religious or secular. This area is obviously in flux right now (the licenses appear to be issued without restriction currently in at least Philadelphia, Montgomery, Chester, and Allegheny counties; they appear to be issued only to certain religions in at least Bucks County). For more info on the state of PA marriage laws, see Pa. marriage law in 'upheaval,' questioned in suits, disputes. --anon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.240.13.143 (talk) 16:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

We went in yesterday to get a self-uniting license for a small ceremony with family, and we were told that it was fully our choice if we wanted to but there was risk that our marriage could be ruled invalid, as there is currently a challenge to such licenses being issued to non-Quakers. I feel fairly confident that she was being honest with us, but I could not find any information on the challenge online. The law itself mentions "religious ceremony without officiating clergy," so I can imagine how a non-religious ceremony like we are planning could be invalid under the law. The text of the law is (apparently) here [1] 76.98.51.9 (talk) 12:16, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Just to top off the discussion, if you are trying to get a self-uniting license in some backwater courthouse, and they give you any trouble, just take a road trip to Pittsburgh or Philadelphia. There are no religious conditions for you to acquire the license; if the clerk tells you there is, they are being ignorant. You could argue with them to double check the law, of course, but if you don't want to deal with them, it doesn't matter where in PA you get your license. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.51.78 (talk) 04:38, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Self-uniting marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080515200733/http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/KnellyTROOrder.pdf to http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/KnellyTROOrder.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Self-uniting marriage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724223111/http://aclupa.org/legal/legaldocket/couplerefusedselfunitingma to http://aclupa.org/legal/legaldocket/couplerefusedselfunitingma

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:43, 23 March 2017 (UTC)