Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content at the RNS Archives website.

(RNS) A federal court in Indiana has rejected atheists' requests to preside at wedding ceremonies, saying only clergy or public officials are licensed to solemnize marriages. By Kimberly Winston.

3 Comments

  1. Aaron Chavez

    I’m sorry but this Judge is obviously ignorant of the meaning of the Establishment clause of the first amendment. The establishment clause has generally been interpreted to prohibit 1) the establishment of a national religion by Congress, or 2) the preference by the U.S. government of one religion over another. What is this if not preferential treatment of Theists? And may I just point out to the under-educated judge that: Marriage does not have it’s roots in Religion. Religion did not form the institution of marriage, and neither did it strengthen it in any way shape or form. Marriage was around long before the Judeo-Christian church. Perhaps a quick education of humanity before the Judeo-Christian church came to power would shed some light on the subject Judge Barker?

  2. In my opinion, Clergy should not be licensed by the State to perform Marriages. There should be a clear separation of Church and State by keeping Clergy out of State involvement. There should a ceremony for the State sanction and a ceremony for Religious sanction, if couples so chose. This would alleviate a lot of the confusion and conflict we have around marriage these days.