Heather’s article, Marriage in the News: Covenant Marriages & Texas Legislation, described five pending bills in Texas related to marriage. Interestingly enough, they were proposed by Republicans and are being questioned and condemned by Democrats, which is the complete opposite of how such things usually work.
Clearly, there is no doubt that I am conservative, but that doesn’t mean I agree with the so-called conservative party’s bid to expand intrusive government. I agree with Democrats on this. That is a rare statement coming from me (despite the fact that I don’t swear by the Republican party line either). In a rare turn of events, Heather appears to agree with Republicans, liking the idea of the government “encouraging” couples to seek counseling or marriage classes before getting married when discussing the Nebraska marriage bill.
Let’s recap: Republicans are pushing big government, Democrats are against it, and strangely enough I agree with Democrats while Heather seems to agree with Republicans. Has the whole word turned upside down?
The only measure pending in Texas that I don’t really find offensive is the HB180, covenant marriage bill, since it seems to be completely voluntary. Still, I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to limit the government’s involvement in marriage instead of increasing it. I believe strong marriages are an integral part of civilized society, but I don’t necessarily think the government is equipped to determine how best to strengthen marriages.
I’m still undecided when it comes to waiting periods. It seems that it isn’t the best idea for people to marry on a whim after knowing another person less than 72 or 120 hours, but is it really the responsibility of the government to protect us from our impulsiveness?
The final Texas bill, HB2685, is much like the Nebraska bill. If interested, you can read my thoughts on that in Marriage in the News: Class or Fee, which Will it Be?
What will lawmakers come up with next?