April 12, 2007
TX Legislature: Mandatory Marriage Course for all Texans
Yesterday, on the floor of the Texas House of Representatives, Rep. Warren Chisum (R-Pampa) raised House Bill 2685, a bill that seeks to encourage couples to undertake "education courses" that would provide them with "the skills necessary to resolve marital conflicts, which will make for stronger marriages that are less likely to end in failure." Under this bill, Texans will be faced with an ultimatum under the law: take a State-designed marriage counseling course, or pay an increased marriage fee (the fee was $60; with this bill, it's increased to $100).
There was a strange odor surrounding the debate on the House floor when this bill came up. After all, who really wants the Government telling them how to get married? It started smelling even stranger when Governor Rick Perry himself -- apparently a big supporter of this bill -- made an unusual appearance on the House floor, seating himself at the right hand of Speaker Tom Craddick, who oversaw the proceedings, gavel in hand. It was hard to tell what was going on here, but one thing's for sure -- Chisum's bill isn't exactly what Texans would call "limited government" (an alleged plank in the Republic Party Platform, by the way).
Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) pleaded with the House, imploring the members to keep the State Government out of the business of marriage counseling. Among others dissidents, Rep. Betty Brown challenged Mr. Coleman, asking him whether the Government should then also stay out of the business of helping children who come from broken homes. Rep. Coleman responded to Mrs. Brown's question by pointing out that the situation was hardy analogous, all the while thinking, "What in the hell are you talking about, woman?"
Certainly, most marriages these days end in divorce. Or at least, a lot of them. Everyone knows this. And when children are involved, there is inevitable harm done. But is this really the way to fix this problem? By forcing people to either take a State-designed marriage counseling course or else pay an exorbitant fee?
In the end, HB 2685 passed the House by a vote of 78 - 63.
Whatcha think, Austin?
*Images courtesy of Wikipedia and Flickr.
|
yes, texans: missionary position only, please.
or maybe they're just trying to prevent domestic violence?
i mean...that's laudable, right?
Nope. My guess is that if we look closely we'll find that Rick Perry and Tom Craddick have a friend who runs a marriage counseling business, and who will benefit greatly from this. Smells like crisis pregnancy centers part deux...
I'm sure we'll find that Tom Craddick and Rick Perry have a friend who just happens to be in the marriage counseling business. They don't do anything in the legislature unless it'll make those two apes money.
I reckon Texas could use a good dose of marriage learnin'.
At least civil servants don't have to publicly report on their menstruation like in Indiana. Oh, sorry, I meant India.
i dunno much about this marrying business, but that bride doing the kegstand..... EPIC.
Wait...it PASSED? *UnbeLIEvable*. So, please edumacate me, S, is this a done deal now??
I'm pissed. I can't believe this. With all the other crap you have to do in order to plan a reasonable wedding, now you have to attend some kinda freakin' state-approved CLASS? Or pony up $40 additional dollars?
What happens to the extra dough? Where does that go? That's what this is all about. That extra $40 per license. Believe me, that's going to add up.
Also, what about people who take classes or go through counseling at their churches? My husband and I did that, and honestly we really enjoyed it -- but it sure as hell shouldn't be *required* of everyone. Still, if you're already getting guidance from your spritual advisor, does that count? Or do you have to ALSO take this stupid state course?
You *know* these courses will end up being very simliar to defensive driving classes. Soon there will be the comedy version...and just wait'll they start offering 'em online! I could go on, but use your imagination. Ugh.
Well, I suggest everyone click the "House Bill 2685" link and see whether your rep voted for this piece of shite. My man Mark Strama was a Nay. I'd have expected no less of him.
Just found out the bill was discussed more today on the House floor. The bill passed, but here's the good news: Rep. Senfronia Thompson successfully added an amendment to the bill that essentially rendered it meaningless. So, even though the bill subsequently passed, all the crap that I wrote about above will not become law.
jooley ann,
The senate would have to sponsor the house bill for it to be brought to the floor and voted upon. Then the two bills are reconciled before it becomes law.
Texas recognizes common law marriage. In other words, if two people (of different genders [thanks fundies]) say "we're married," they're married. Unless the current house law penalizes married couples at some point for choosing that route, this bill is utterly devoid of meaning and sense.
Besides being an unnecessary intrusion into citizens' private affairs, the bad thing about this bill is the proposal for lengthening the waiting period for no-fault divorces.
When no-fault divorces become more difficult to obtain, the parties are more likely to raise more serious and more damaging allegations against each other in order to attempt to avoid delays in moving on with their lives. This would likely lead to greater cost and decreased pursuit of happiness.
who gives a shit? maybe it'll prevent more marriages - which can never be a bad thing.