Catholics and marriage licenses

  • Thread starter Thread starter ByWhatAuthority
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The taxation implications aren’t initiated because of the marriage license situation specifically (though personal taxation is different if you are married or single).

The taxation issue arises because of the particular political ideology espoused by these groups, which is why I referred you to materials discussing the concepts of “sovereign citizens” or “Freemen-on-the-land”. These individuals purport to have “withdrawn” from a “contract” with the state, and thus claim they are no longer liable to the state for things like taxation (despite living in the state and continuing to consume its resources). They also frequently claim immunity from things such as traffic offenses, etc.

As a result, anyone seeking a benefit on the basis of this particular political status is treated as, quite simply, a scam artist who is seeking to avoid their responsibilities.
 
I have seen something of this ‘sovereign state’ claim on the Youtube. What I have seen suggested that it is a misreading of certain documents but claiming to be ‘Freeman’ is not accepted in US law before a judge in court.

So how could such people avoid taxation?

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Post 20 is asserted by the op so that is a moot point. Post 23 refutes that point, and so do many subsequent replies. Read a bit further. There are many context clues to point to issues with authority.

The op’s user name is interesting too.
 
They can’t. If they own property and refuse to pay property taxes they will eventually lose the property as the state will take it and sell it for the past taxes.

If the refuse to pay income taxes sooner or later they are going to deal with the IRS.

They have to pay sales tax unless they are exempt or are stealing.

Our government is not tyrannical. It is not wasting resources hunting these people down to bring them in line. It uses the normal channels and gets to them when it comes up.

Americans know these arguments, we also know they have failed time and time again in our court system. That is why so many people are saying what the OP is describing is not legal. This group gets scorn from most American because they get the benefits of our taxes (roads, police force, firefighters, parks, etc.) while refusing to pay their fair share…and they are uppity about it to boot. They don’t love their country. They are not honest people.
 
abucs said:
I am not sure about your comment implicitly suggesting somehow my beliefs are standing in the way. I am reading through all the posts now and I can’t find anyone so far who is asking for a priest to deliberately break the law for taxation purposes.
Click to expand...
The poster has not given a comprehensible rationale for need to get married without a license, that we can agree on. We can also agree that the poster is asking the priest to break the law. What the motive for not wanting a marriage license is not clear from the OP, the OP has been less than forthcoming in that regard. If I were a priest and a parishioner wanted me to break the law, there had better be a darn good reason for it. So far the OP has not given any legitimate reason for demanding that the priest break the law.
 
Thanks, this answers the question. You are saying (if I understand correctly) that a state marriage licence is a prompt to the government that there may be someone who owes taxes or is not currently in their tax system who is avoiding taxes. Without the state issuing a marriage licence, they may go undetected for longer.

In Australia if I do not declare my income each year, even if it is zero, the government very quickly comes after me within weeks.

Regards.
 
Last edited:
Well when you consider American tax practises (how it has just been explained) then what you say could very well be true. It seems to be a different set up in America. I do favour a separation of church sacrament and secular law but of course if there are legal impediments involving taxation in certain jurisdictions, then those issues would need to be settled first.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
FrDavid96 said:
It is simple. It is a criminal scam to avoid paying taxes. People stay “under the radar” by not having any government paperwork or record of them. A marriage license is a legal document, which is exactly what they want to avoid–any legal record of their identity.

They want the Church to participate in this scam by performing illegal weddings for them.
Click to expand...
Right.

There’s also the potential that the more naive do not realize what harm and inconvenience they are going to be causing to their prospective spouse or their future children. So it’s not just a scam against the state–it’s also potentially a scam against one of the spouses who doesn’t realize what they are losing and the dangers that they are exposing themselves to. That’s particularly likely if one of the spouses is young, naive and sheltered. (And come to think of it, some of these people are really keen on very young brides.)
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
Thank you so much @abucs ! I agree 100%. I too will change my terminology and call Catholic marriage by its rightful name, Matrimony. A sacrament that we should NOT have to get permission from the state to receive.
Click to expand...
I don’t know about anyone else, but I did not receive permission from the state to get married. But the minster received acknowledgment that I was not married

I went to the state to get a marriage license, which provided proof that I was not already married. On the day of my marriage, I handed it to the minster and had it signed by my two witnesses. We then got married (though I think technically, we were supposed to have it signed after the wedding - not a few minutes before in case some chickened out… but what’s done is done).

Then, the signed license was sent in and I received a marriage certificate.

I no longer have a marriage licences… I have a marriage certificate. The whole point of a marriage license is the state acknowledging that you are not currently married and to prepare for the legal rights that marriage provides.

But more than anything else, it lets the minster know he/she can marry you. That’s why it has to be in the State where the marriage takes place in, even if neither spouse lives in that state.

http://www.differencebetween.net/mi...-marriage-license-and-a-marriage-certificate/
 
Last edited:
ByWhatAuthority said:
A sacrament that we should NOT have to get permission from the state to receive.
Click to expand...
Let me ask you a question. In today’s pluralistic societies, how to you propose the Church figures out who is married and who isn’t without the state?

Back in the middle ages, the Church kept all the records and everyone was Catholic. In many ways, the Catholic Church was the local bureaucracy.

But today, not only are people from a ton of different religions, but people no longer live where they grew up, nor do they often get married where they grew up. And people marry others from other parts of the country & world now, not just from their home towns.

It’s not like the priest can simply call the neighboring protestant churches and synagogues to figure out if a non-Catholic can marry. And with so many Catholics not marrying in the Church like they are supposed to, a priest can’t trust that he can solely depend on Church paperwork.

So we need the state, because bringing back the banns isn’t really going to work with interfaith and cross country marriages.

God bless
 
Last edited:
abucs said:
You are saying (if I understand correctly) that a state marriage licence is a prompt to the government that there may be someone who owes taxes or is not currently in their tax system who is avoiding taxes. Without the state issuing a marriage licence, they may go undetected for longer.
Click to expand...
No one is saying that.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
My friend is unable to obtain a marriage license.
Click to expand...
You have not sufficiently explained why a couple is UNABLE to obtain a marriage license.

One does not have to be a citizen or a resident of the US to marry in the US. Foreign nationals can travel to the US for a destination wedding just as US nationals can travel abroad and marry.

To claim someone has been DENIED a marriage license indicates something is truly amiss in the situation. Denials is very limited.

Why specifically were they denied? If you cannot or will not be specific this is just a pointless thread.
 
I think that what the OP should say (but doesn’t want to) is that the couple is UNWILLING to obtain a marriage license. Not UNABLE at all.
 
Yes, I know. And as I said, that’s really inaccurate. They are unwilling.
 
angel12 said:
Yes, I know. And as I said, that’s really inaccurate. They are unwilling.
Click to expand...
Unless there’s something really weird going on that would probably make it impossible to get a church wedding, either.
 
Excuse me but I am talking to another poster. Please let her answer for herself. She seems more than capable in responding properly.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
abucs said:
Excuse me but I am talking to another poster. Please let her answer for herself. She seems more than capable in responding properly.

Thank you.
Click to expand...
🤨 Seriously?

Public forum means public response. If you want to have a private conversation, send a PM.

Otherwise, all posts are fair game.

Play on.
 
Gertabelle said:
🤨 Seriously?

Public forum means public response. If you want to have a private conversation, send a PM.

Otherwise, all posts are fair game.

Play on.
Click to expand...
I was having a conversation with someone who was explaining the American tax law. When I am respectfully asking a poster if I am understanding her correctly then someone else replying ‘no one said that’ doesn’t help in that conversation.

If the writer were to say, I don’t think she means that, she means this … then at least that would be a proper response. I am after a response that actually gets somewhere.

I do not see posts as ‘fair game’ or this forum as ‘play’. I see this as mature discussion that should actually lead somewhere with respectful replies.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Leaving aside the personal criticisms, it is true that I do not get to decide who responds. I am however asking someone giving a non answer to a question respectfully asked to another poster to please refrain from doing so.

I have been respectful to all who have replied to me while stating my positions clearly. Any reasonable reading of this thread shows that…

Thanks for your post.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top