Bill for secular marriages passes in Senead, but it needs to be amended

Hopefully it's been done up since

Grand Canal St. in Dublin is nice.

im interested in the paperwork i think i gather from what some of the politicians said, that they wanted a body of 5 years standing because of the complex paperwork involved although it doesn't actually look complicated for most people http://www.groireland.ie/getting_married.htm#section4

I wonder if anyone here who marrying a person not born here had to go through?
how much more work did your priest or registrar have to do if at all?


if theres anything to look into that's done by the dept of health, foreign affairs and justice not the solmeniser

are the politician punishing many people for the tiny amount of fraud that may occur, suggesting they will be the source of more fraud, its the classic department line, we've much of recently

some november 2012 updates to solemnising http://www.groireland.ie/docs/Notes_for_Religious_Solemnisers_Updated_Nov_2012.pdf

All couples must now present in person to a Registrar to give their three months’
notice

were AI suggesting changing that nope, so no there could be no drive through spur of the moment elvis weddings as joan was suggesting

It is important to advise couples that they
should have all documentation in order before the visit to the Registrar’s Office
in order to avoid the necessity for a second visit. In this regard it is essential that
the proposed solemniser is on the register at the time of giving notification.

hmm ok


the HSE registrar handles all this stuff for all kinds of marriages why do they need special demands for secular bodies
you get a Marriage Registration Form filled in and signed with the HSE and you give that to the solemniser.

The Marriage Registration Form is the civil authorisation for the marriage to proceed. Any marriage solemnised without a Marriage Registration Form will be null and void in civil law and of no legal effect.

ok

2.2 Checking the Marriage Registration Form
A Marriage Registration Form (MRF) is issued to every couple once they have completed the necessary civil preliminaries with the registrar. The couple are obliged under the Act to give this form to the solemniser before the ceremony (the couple and the solemniser should make their arrangements regarding how and when this is done). The solemniser must check the MRF to ensure that it is correct as far as he or she is aware – this would particularly apply to the details regarding the solemniser and where the marriage is taking place. (There will obviously be details on the MRF relating to the couple which the solemniser may not be familiar with).
Section 48(3) of the Act states that a marriage shall not be solemnised unless one of the parties to the marriage has given the relevant MRF to the person solemnising the marriage, for examination by him or her. Under Section 69(10) (c) of the Act, a person, who being a registered solemniser, solemnises a marriage without the MRF having been given to him or her, before the solemnisation, for examination by him or her is guilty of an offence.

so the solmeniser just has to check the MRF, that doesn't sound too onerous...

Last-minute amendments to the MRF
While couples will be requested to ensure that any necessary changes to the MRF are notified to the Registrar in advance of the ceremony so as to allow for it to be amended and reissued, situations will arise (e.g. illness of the solemniser) where changes will have to be made to the MRF at the ceremony. When this arises, the necessary amendment/s should be clearly made on the MRF by the solemniser and initialled by the solemniser, both parties and both witnesses. There is a section in the MRF which should also be completed and signed, explaining the nature of and reason for the changes.

so solemeniser can amend the important MRF

Immediately after the ceremony, the MRF must be signed by the couple, the two witnesses and the registered solemniser. The MRF should be returned to a registrar (not necessarily the registrar who issued the MRF or a registrar in the area where the marriage took place) within a month of the ceremony so that the marriage can be civilly registered. It is the responsibility of the couple, not the solemniser, to ensure that the MRF is returned to the registrar.

the paperwork is between the couple and the authorities not the solmeniser

note the law does allow for shotgun weddings

Michael I know this is OT but is there any more information on the bishops' meeting with government and whether other secular or faith groups will be afforded the same?

kenny/bishop meeting happening today 3 hours so far

an issue came up last week about people wanting to get married at outdoor venues. the rules state the civil ceremony must take place in public venue, with four walls and a roof, some want to get married outdoors or perhaps in a marqueue on the grounds of grand house of hotel, the general registrar currently applies the law tightly not allowing this.

I kinda agree civil ceremonies are supposed to civil/public, the resstriction is there so peopel can find the place, object and to try to avoid coerced marraiges.

see jerry buttimers dail speech and transcript http://jerrybuttimer.ie/2014/07/03/buttimer-calls-for-legislative-change-to-increase-choice-of-wedding-venues/

Humanists to take legal action to overturn outdoor weddings ban
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/humanists-to-take-legal-action-to-overturn-outdoor-weddings-ban-1.1849681

Irish law protects marriage from ethical atheists and unethical humanists but not from a spiritualist thief http://atheist.ie/2015/03/irish-law-protects-marriage-from-ethical-atheists/

This wording means that marriage needs to be protected from atheists who are not humanists, and from humanists who are not ethical.


Discrimination on the ground of religion or belief

This piece of legislation shows the contempt the state holds for the non-religious in Ireland. It tells us that:

The state accepts that once you are religious, then you are a fit and proper person.
If you are a humanist, then in order to be a fit and proper person, the law requires you to be ethical as well.
Being an ethical atheist does not come into the reasoning at all, as you are simply not considered a fit a proper person to come under this legislation.

This discriminatory piece of legislation benefits only religious bodies however new or old, and humanist bodies that are both ethical and have been in existence for five years or more.

You could object. On the other hand, nothing in the Act suggests that its the personal qualities or characteristics of an individual which qualify him to celebrate marriages in the first place, and registration as a celebrant is not any kind of endorsement or accolade for the individual. For both religious and secular celebrants, the Act focuses on the nominating body, rather than on the individual nominated.

As expectationlost points out, the registrar does have the right to cancel an individual registration on the grounds that the individual is not "a fit and proper person to solemnise a marriage". But I don't think that means the registrar can cancel the registration because he doesn't like you, or because expectationlost or Peregrinus don't like you; I'm pretty sure the courts would hold that this power must be exercised by reference to some characteristic or quality in the individual concerned which specifically impairs his ability to celebrate marriages in compliance with the Act. The courts have recognised that there's a constitutional right to earn a living, so the exercise of a power to exclude someone from a particular profession or occupation is usually scrutinised carefully.

Plus, there's a constitutional principle of the separation of powers. It's the legislator's job to set the parameters for criminal penalties, and the court's job to apply those penalties in specific cases. The Registrar is neither a legislator or a court, so his power in this regard is again going to be construed fairly narrowly by the courts. If the Oireachtas had intended a conviction for fraud (or for serious criminal offence, or for any criminal offence at all) to be a bar to being a marriage celebrant, it would have been a simple matter to say so in the Act. They didn't say so; conspicuously, only a conviction for an offence under this Act is a bar. The Registrar doesn't have the right to add to the penalties that the Oireachtas has specified on conviction for fraud. If he wants to bar this bloke he's going to have to satisfy himself that the fraud conviction bears in some identifiable way on his fitness to celebrate marriage. I think he might be on sticky grounds there, given that as a celebrant Colton is not in the position of handling clients' money, which is the context in which he committed his fraud.

In the short term the issue doesn't arise; Colton is in prison and therefore cannot celebrate marriages. My expectation is that before or upon his release he'll be deregistered by his own church, and if people want him to be deregistered they are probably better off putting pressure on the church than on the Registrar.