Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the House on February 16, 2006, to require the cleric or magistrate officiating at a marriage to indicate on the marriage certificate whether the parties had taken pre-marital education training proposed by House Bill 5699

The vote was 92 in favor, 12 opposed and 3 not voting

(House Roll Call 835 at House Journal 67)

Click here to view bill details.

It's no one's business. It would be great if people got counseling early but, the fact is, even if they do, and the counselor thinks it's a match made in Hell, there is nothing t prevent this marriage. So, why hould they get some special indication that they put thier butts in a chair for the required period of time? Also, it's not one business.

This looks like an opportunity to PENALIZE someone down the road. Who and how, I don't know. Seems VERY NEGATIVE! Big brotherish. Now, if you want to give a taxbreak for it, however small, that would help a couple out. Kwuit(is that how you spell it?) has a government that gives large gifts of money when a couple gives money. Give them a small tax credit for doing it. Don't BLACKMARK them for it. Do they get a discount in their divorce proceedings if they have it on their marriage certificate?

Offer these services to people, don't cram them down their throats. Help them by offer tax credit.

A no go!

What in the U.S. Constitution or the Michigan State Constitution allows government to interfere in individual private choices? Next, you will decide whether or not someone can marry. Get the devil out of our lives and out of our private business.

If you want the offer free classes as a government about financial literacy, parenting, knock yourself out. There should be no stigma one way or another.

If you want the offer free classes as a government about financial literacy, parenting, knock yourself out. There should be no stigma one way or another.