Lawmakers Consider Preventing ALL Marriage In Oklahoma

[Suzanimal]

Lawmakers Consider Preventing ALL Marriage In Oklahoma

OKLAHOMA CITY -

State lawmakers are considering throwing out marriage in Oklahoma.

The idea stems from a bill filed by Rep. Mike Turner (R-Edmond). Turner says it's an attempt to keep same-sex marriage illegal in Oklahoma while satisfying the U.S. Constitution. Critics are calling it a political stunt while supporters say it's what Oklahomans want.

"[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all," Turner said.

Other conservative lawmakers feel the same way, according to Turner.

"Would it be realistic for the State of Oklahoma to say, ‘We're not going to do marriage period,'" asked News 9's Michael Konopasek.

"That would definitely be a realistic opportunity, and it's something that would be part of the discussion," Turner answered.

Such a discussion will be made possible by a current shell bill -- something that can be changed at almost any time to react to upcoming rulings on Oklahoma's same-sex marriage ban.

"I think that, especially with issues like this, [these lawmakers are] out of touch with most Oklahomans," said Ryan Kiesel, ACLU Oklahoma executive detector.

Kiesel says prohibiting all marriage is new territory. In fact, the ACLU was unable to find an example of where a state has ever tried to ban all marriage. Kiesel believes the entire idea just boils down to politics.

"Moving forward I think we'll see less efforts like this," Kiesel said.

Turner admits his idea makes a lot of people uncomfortable. He also says, "I accept that." Turner plans to wait until the federal appeals process plays out. The fight over Oklahoma's ban on same-sex marriage will now head to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver

http://www.news9.com/story/24543033/lawmakers-consider-preventing-all-marriage-in-oklahoma

 

[jmdrake]

Wow! Okay, I need to bookmark this the next time someone says "But jmdrake, we all know the government will never get out of marriage." Now true, this hasn't happened yet, but that fact that it is at least a serious proposals proves it is a possibility even in our lifetime.

 

[phill4paul]

Outstanding.

 

[jmdrake]

Outstanding.

And look who's leading the charge.

Other conservative lawmakers feel the same way, according to Turner.

Why there is such disdain for social conservatives by many on this forum is beyond me. It is certainly possible to win them over to our side on many arguments. The key is framing the debate.

 

[pcosmar]

Wow! Okay, I need to bookmark this the next time someone says "But jmdrake, we all know the government will never get out of marriage." Now true, this hasn't happened yet, but that fact that it is at least a serious proposals proves it is a possibility even in our lifetime.

That is not getting "Government Out of Marriage".

That is Using Government force to Outlaw marriage.

They can't get their way so they will attack marriage itself. It is still the government regulating it,, It is forbidding it altogether.

Both petty and stupid.

 

[phill4paul]

That is not getting "Government Out of Marriage".

That is Using Government force to Outlaw marriage.

They can't get their way so they will attack marriage itself. It is still the government regulating it,, It is forbidding it altogether.

Both petty and stupid.

Yeah, after re-reading, I don't understand what is trying to be accomplished because this article is not well written. Is the bill directed at ending government involvement in marriage or is it about making marriage illegal?

 

[pcosmar]

Yeah, after re-reading, I don't understand what is trying to be accomplished because this article is not well written. Is the bill directed at ending government involvement in marriage or is it about making marriage illegal?

Prohibitionists gonna Prohibit.

 

[Occam's Banana]

[Oklahoma State Rep. Mike Turner says that his bill is] an attempt to keep same-sex marriage illegal [...]

This does NOT jibe or track with getting the government out of marriage.

[Ryan Kiesel, ACLU Oklahoma executive detector] says prohibiting all marriage is new territory. In fact, the ACLU was unable to find an example of where a state has ever tried to ban all marriage. Kiesel believes the entire idea just boils down to politics.

So is this Kiesel character just talking out of his ass and deliberately warping what this bill would do?

Or does the bill actually involve "prohibiting and banning all marriage?"

Because "prohibiting and banning all marriage" is very clearly NOT "getting the government out of marriage" ...

 

[jmdrake]

That is not getting "Government Out of Marriage".

That is Using Government force to Outlaw marriage.

They can't get their way so they will attack marriage itself. It is still the government regulating it,, It is forbidding it altogether.

Both petty and stupid.

Did you actually read the article or did you stop at reading the thread title?

"[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all," Turner said.

Don't let your own prejudice blind you to the truth.

 

[Suzanimal]

That is not getting "Government Out of Marriage".

That is Using Government force to Outlaw marriage.

They can't get their way so they will attack marriage itself. It is still the government regulating it,, It is forbidding it altogether.

Both petty and stupid.

Yeah, after re-reading, I don't understand what is trying to be accomplished because this article is not well written. Is the bill directed at ending government involvement in marriage or is it about making marriage illegal?

I don't think so, I think the Rep is trying to get government out of marriage.

"[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all," Turner said.

The ACLU lawyer is the one who's saying he's trying to outlaw marriage.

Kiesel says prohibiting all marriage is new territory. In fact, the ACLU was unable to find an example of where a state has ever tried to ban all marriage. Kiesel believes the entire idea just boils down to politics.

 

[torchbearer]

And look who's leading the charge.

Other conservative lawmakers feel the same way, according to Turner.

Why there is such disdain for social conservatives by many on this forum is beyond me. It is certainly possible to win them over to our side on many arguments. The key is framing the debate.

I agree.
Once you get force out of the equation, people can get along. remove the state(force) and then there is no problem. no force either way.
each church or association decides who they marry. and everyone can form a marriage contract. freedom of contract. freedom of association.
now, i don't know if this is what they are thinking in oklahoma. it sounds weird stated, preventing all marriage. almost like they want to get rid of the social institution.

 

[invisible]

I was wondering when someone would pick up on this in the "how to stop the gay marriage tidal wave" thread. This is exactly how exactly that is being attempted here in OK. A lot of people are awfully upset about a federal judge overturning the state's ban on gay marriage. 10th Amendment is just as popular here as gay marriage is unpopular. When the federal gov't tries to cram something down people's throats here, the people in this state push back: real id, obombacare, agenda 21, 2A. While I personally don't care who marries who, and have no desire to make other people's sex lives my business, this is an example of a state standing up for their right to make their own laws. Those things said, I don't necessarily feel it's the greatest legislation ever introduced, but then again, I haven't been paying much attention to this one.

 

[pcosmar]

I don't think so, I think the Rep is trying to get government out of marriage.

No it s an attempt to keep Gay Marriage Illegal by making all marriage illegal..

It is ridiculous,, but it may lead to getting the some discussion of ending State involvement.

Mostly,, I think it will be a joke that is laughed out of the news.

 

[jmdrake]

I don't think so, I think the Rep is trying to get government out of marriage.



The ACLU lawyer is the one who's saying he's trying to outlaw marriage.

True. I think the thread title could be better, but then again you took it from the title of the article. Nowhere does the lawmaker say "We want to keep gay marriage illegal" (actually it isn't illegal. It just isn't recognized). And the lawmaker doesn't say "We want to ban all marriages." The only place where they actually quote him is when he says "[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all". For all we know, Turner is a Ron Paul supporting libertarian. I could see Glenn Bradley introducing the exact same bill. And I could see the lamestream media and the ACLU trying to misrepresent his position as well. I thought RPFers were smarter than to fall for such blatant propaganda?

 

[jmdrake]

No it s an attempt to keep Gay Marriage Illegal by making all marriage illegal..

And you believe that shit because the ACLU said so? Seriously? Nowhere in the article does Rep Turner say any such thing. You've been snookered. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

 

[pcosmar]

now, i don't know if this is what they are thinking in oklahoma. it sounds weird stated, preventing all marriage. almost like they want to get rid of the social institution.

It is more like,, "if I can't get my own way I take my ball and go home"

 

[jmdrake]

I agree.
Once you get force out of the equation, people can get along. remove the state(force) and then there is no problem. no force either way.
each church or association decides who they marry. and everyone can form a marriage contract. freedom of contract. freedom of association.
now, i don't know if this is what they are thinking in oklahoma. it sounds weird stated, preventing all marriage. almost like they want to get rid of the social institution.

The only quote from the representative is:

[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all

Remember how the media misrepresents what Ron Paul says? Why would anyone thing they would treat this lawmaker from Oklahoma any differently? If it's not in quotes, don't believe the media when they say "So and so said such and such." The media would have you believe Ron Paul supports Al Qaeda and Rand Paul wants babies gassed in Syria.

 

[pcosmar]

And you believe that shit because the ACLU said so? Seriously? Nowhere in the article does Rep Turner say any such thing. You've been snookered. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

NO, Because of what the guy said about it.
And I have not read this bill (it is not posted),, BUT THE STATED PURPOSE is to keep Gay Marriage illegal.

 

[invisible]

True. I think the thread title could be better, but then again you took it from the title of the article. Nowhere does the lawmaker say "We want to keep gay marriage illegal" (actually it isn't illegal. It just isn't recognized). And the lawmaker doesn't say "We want to ban all marriages." The only place where they actually quote him is when he says "[My constituents are] willing to have that discussion about whether marriage needs to be regulated by the state at all". For all we know, Turner is a Ron Paul supporting libertarian. I could see Glenn Bradley introducing the exact same bill. And I could see the lamestream media and the ACLU trying to misrepresent his position as well. I thought RPFers were smarter than to fall for such blatant propaganda?

And there are quite a few of them in the OK State Legislature. Some have openly endorsed in the past, others seem to be in stealth mode. Not sure about Turner though, I've never checked into him too closely.

IA also had gay marriage forced on them by the courts against the will of the people, but they just rolled over, accepted it, and didn't fight back.

 

[jmdrake]

It is more like,, "if I can't get my own way I take my ball and go home"

And that's the correct position. I'll take my ball to my church where marriage is done in accordance to my beliefs. You take your ball to your church where marriage is done in accordance to your beliefs. There's now even a megachurch for atheists, so everyone can find a place to get married. I don't subsidize your marriage. You don't subsidize my marriage.