| 
|
Page: Profile: Wren's Nest News Local
| Total Views: 4,942,992
|
Article: 17271
[Legal]
Date Posted:
2/11/2007
8:28:30 am EST
Wvox Stats
Views: 8,620
RSS: 21,656
Comments: 15
|
N.D. Senate OKs Cohabitation Law Change
Author: Dale Wetzel, AP Source: ABC News (US)
Title: N.D. SENATE OKS COHABITATION LAW CHANGE
Living together out of wedlock would be downgraded from a sex crime to fraud, and then only if the couple claims to be married, under a proposal that passed the state Senate on Friday.
The bill was changed from an outright repeal of the state's anti-cohabitation law. The amended proposal would make the false representation of marital status a misdemeanor crime for a man and woman who live together.
Cohabiting couples who do not falsely claim marriage would not be penalized.
| Options: [Read Full Story] [Comments Locked]
[Email to a Friend]
|
|
Community Thoughts: There are 15 comments posted | Reverse Sort |
| This Real Stinks | Feb 13th. at 12:34:10 pm EST
|
Ander s. Drake (hays, Kansas) - Email Me
when will those cazy people stop trying to tell every body how to run there personal lives. I'd tell these jerks to go to hell. what happens in some elas house, apt, is their business, not the governments. It's not the landlords business either. people have the right to live with out being bullied by what sounds like some law from the 1600's when people let the christian church told married couples what day they could have sex on. this state is setting a terriable example. there should be an amendment to keep any nazi law maker from keeping people from being together, if they don't want to be married in what is a christian sense then all the better.
|
| A Fraud Itself | Feb 12th. at 11:39:36 am EST
|
Terry (Irvington, Virginia) - Email Me
It's strange that this revised law would proscribe fraud, when it appears to be one itself.
Much of the effect of this law exists in potential for selective prosecution or illegal prior restraint, and in technical definitions or intentional lack thereof, such that spiritual marriages, traditions equivalent to marriage of religions using different words, common law marriages from other jurisdictions, Muslim, Mormon, or pagan poly marriages discriminated against by state laws, etc. are not frauds, even if so defined under what it appears some politicians intend to be legal traps to retain past illegal intent and effect.
About a quarter of US states recognize Common Law marriages, under far from uniform terms as to time periods for it to exist and other criteria, while most reject recognition of them in large part because of difficulties for law or contractual parties to identify or enforce marriage law based provisions when verification or cross-state enforcement are nearly impossible.
Ultimately what's overdue is a national precedent to ban marriage laws, and restrict states to domestic partnership contract law which is uniformly open to any number and sexes of persons competent to so contract, including formation, modification, and termination of such contracts. Such contracts should procedurally be possible to execute coincident with private or religious ceremonies, but specify or require no officiant nor rituals, in that way also ending coercion in many states for clergy to act as state agent marriage officiants alternately with other state officials.
But, Northeastern and Western states may well be more tactically viable venues for establishing such practices in states, and then using Federal courts to push for nationwide standards. Elimination of marriage laws and rulings that they are necessarily unConstitutional would circumvent state laws and recent Constitutional discrimination amendments, as if such laws were invalidated, it wouldn't be an attempt to simulate marriage if two or more people of whatever sexes entered various contractual arrangements, whether state hosted domestic partnerships, or private trusts, wills, powers of attorney, medical agreements, etc.
|
| Is There Common-law Marriage In The US? | Feb 12th. at 7:21:47 am EST
|
LD Wolverine (Edmonton, Ontario) - Email Me
As a member of the Canadian Forces I have been offered opportunities to live and work both in Washington DC and in Colorado Springs. Part of the offer package (which is a generic package sent to all candidates) is a section on Common Law Marriages. It states that if the candidate is in a Common-Law Marriage they should not consider moving to the US because such marriages are not considered legal there. I myself am married so it didn't matter but i know many couples that have been together almost as long as my husband and I (and we've been married for 17 years) and they see no reason to have some court or papers tell them they are a couple.
I simply do not understand the United States' molasses like progress when it comes to personal relationships. You would think that a world power, one that sees itself right up there in their technological advances with the best of the best, would also be a forerunner for personal rights and freedoms but I have to say I am continuously shaking my head at the "Shrub's" disregard for his people. It saddens me.
Come on up to Canada! Its snowing right now but I am sure you'll cope!!
|
| Dude, What? | Feb 12th. at 3:51:59 am EST
|
Morboriel (Brooklyn, New York) - Email Me
What in the Nine Hells is wrong with North Dakota? (And I say this having moved to Phoenix where we have the lovely bat guano Joe Arpaio as sheriff) .
|
| Common Law Marriage | Feb 11th. at 6:23:19 pm EST
|
Kathleen (West Fargo, North Dakota) - Email Me
There is no such thing as 'common law marriage' in North Dakota. So, I can see how and why the law was rewritten to keep people from saying they are married but they really aren't.
|
| Really? | Feb 11th. at 4:30:34 pm EST
|
Skye Silverstar (Edmonton, British Columbia) - Email Me
Oooo... I didn't realize this was still a crime, anywhere! It's kind of shoking to see it so close to home.
Here in Canada, people living together for more than one year are cnsidered Common Law, and subject to all the same rights and responsibilities as marriage.
I suppose the only difference is the way you leave. No divorces, you know? Just up and go.
Of course, if there were any children born after the common law status occured, then both parents have custody, and that needs to be worked out.
|
| If Times Change-so Should The Laws... | Feb 11th. at 12:52:06 pm EST
|
bigcat (peoria, Illinois) - Email Me
There are many who live out of wedlock, not because of fraud purposes, but because it is simply easier to pay the bills and rent a place together than alone. A lot of older couples and many younger ones too, do this for that very reason and can not or do not marry because joint filing income taxes may cost more and it is easier to claim only oneself. And both usually have some system worked out to take care of each other for emergency purposes. And whether the couple is hetero-or same sex or whether there are kids or not- isn't always the issue. Finances often are.
That is the reason that such stupid laws should hit the trash bin- because they are as narrow in scope-as well as mind.
|
| Centennial Admission | Feb 11th. at 12:33:56 pm EST
|
Ahr-Ohn (Bridgeport, Connecticut) - Email Me
19th Century, ND was admitted to Statehood on the Centennial Year of the Constitution, 1889.
"The bill was changed from an outright repeal of the state's anti-cohabitation law. The amended proposal would make the false representation of marital status a misdemeanor crime for a man and woman who live together.
Cohabiting couples who do not falsely claim marriage would not be penalized. "
Time was, cohabitation as Married resulted in validation of that status; it was called Common Law Marriage. Most states had it, especially the Wild West. Was North Dakota trying to protect the rights of Working Girls to conduct business on their own terms?
I understand they've a short but fast growing season. What acreage would it take to support ~600 people, as population of a school of WitchCraft and Wizardry?
Arawn
|
| Hmmmm | Feb 11th. at 10:25:39 am EST
|
Rev. Ryan Adams (SWC) (Fort Polk, Texas) - Email Me
I wonder how they deal with those who live in Freshman dorms.......alot of same-sex cohabitation going on there....
Its a stupid law and it needs to go away.
|
Disclaimer: The Witches' Voice inc does not verify the accuracy of the details stated in this listing, nor do we vouch for the value of the goods or services presented here... As with all contacts and financial dealings in cyberspace, we encourage you to use caution and wisdom in your dealings with strangers.
Political Statements: Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren's Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches' Voice, Inc. TWV is a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization.
|
State/Country flags created by 3dflags.com and are used with permission
Web Site Content (including: text - graphics - html - look & feel)
Copyright 1997-2009 The Witches' Voice Inc. All rights reserved
Note: Authors & Artists retain the copyright for their work(s) on this website.
Unauthorized reproduction without prior permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Website structure, evolution and php coding by Fritz Jung on a Macintosh G5.
Any and all personal political opinions expressed in the public listing sections (including, but not restricted to, personals, events, groups, shops, Wren’s Nest, etc.) are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinion of The Witches’ Voice, Inc. TWV is a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization.
Sponsorship: Visit the Witches' Voice Sponsor Page for info on how you
can help support this Community Resource. Donations ARE Tax Deductible.
The Witches' Voice carries a 501(c)(3) certificate and a Federal Tax ID.
Mail Us: The Witches' Voice Inc., P.O. Box 341018, Tampa, Florida 33694-1018 U.S.A.
| |
