Unsurprisingly Washington D.C. does not think highly of Mark Reed and Dante Walkup’s attempt to use a Skype in Texas to become legally married there: D.C.’s marriage bureau has rejected the couple’s application, because the ceremony did not take place within the district.
That’s correct: While Sheila Alexander-Reid officiated from D.C., Mark and Dante were in Texas, where all marriages marriages might be illegal. It’s not that D.C. doesn’t want two men getting married — the city already took care of that — but just that they follow the rules.
So maybe the Dallas Morning News has a new excuse for rejecting their wedding announcement: there wasn’t a real wedding.
jak
Could they not afford two plane tickets?
7
@jak: sounds like you’ve never planned a wedding before.
Adam
i get it and dear god do i wish marriage was legal for us all, i could get married to my boyfriend, whom i have loved with all my heart for a very long time, if this was possible, in kansas even. But this usurps texas law and these gorgeous men were on texas soil when the ceremony was performed. options are limited for us at the moment, if u want to be legally married u have to actually be on soil where it is legal. if d.c. opens the door to this, it makes gay marriage legal everywhere, essentially, and that takes away citizens rights, as unfair as their opinions may be. we need to take away tax-exempt status from organizations that back these anti-gay marriage elections and maybe we would win one. organizations outside the state voting should NOT be allowed to participate in swaying voters against or for ANYTHING! BRING THE MORMON CHURCH DOWN! They are the biggest $$ towards anything anti-us (anti gay)
Mike in Asheville
The DC/Texas marriage seemed not-quite-believable when it was first reported. The concept of holding marriage ceremonies where parties are in separate locations began during WWII (I believe though perhaps earlier) when GIs in Europe and Asia were able to marry, via telephone, their intendeds who remained back home.
In those cases, though, the bride was physically in the same location as the officiator while the groom and best man were remote. The marriage laws followed were those where the officiator, with bride, maid-of-honor and witnesses in attendance, was licensed to perform the ceremony.
In this case, neither party to the marriage was present in DC. So, yes, this so-called “e-marriage” usurps the laws of various states in favor of the laws of the remote location.
Some states allow the age of consent for marriage to be 13 (New Hampshire, for girls with parental consent). I certainly would hate to see a situation were some 13 year-old Utah Mormon girl is pushed into a marriage with some 50+ year-old buddy of the girl’s father, via NH’s legal laws.
AndrewW
Some people will do ANYTHING for ATTENTION.