LOL
All good points.
You are correct. In states that still recognize common law marriage, a marriage can still be legally recognized by the state if the couple meets the state's minimum requirements for common law marriage. And yes, if recognized by the state, the couple must divorce through the courts the same way those in civil marriages have to go through the courts.
The only states that still recognize common law marriages are:
◾Alabama
◾Colorado
◾District of Columbia
◾Georgia (if created before 1/1/97)
◾Idaho (if created before 1/1/96)
◾Iowa
◾Kansas
◾Montana
◾New Hampshire (for inheritance purposes only)
◾Ohio (if created before 10/10/91)
◾Oklahoma (possibly only if created before 11/1/98. Oklahoma’s laws and court decisions may be in conflict about whether common law marriages formed in that state after 11/1/98 will be recognized.)
◾Pennsylvania (if created before 1/1/05)
◾Rhode Island
◾South Carolina
◾Texas
◾Utah
In states where a common law marriage isn't recognized, those who wish to have a "government free marriage" are free to do so without concern that the state will get involved.
You made an excellent point when you said,
I'd only add this...
While there is an element of truth to that, if one examines older Christian traditions, it wasn't uncommon for groups such as Amish, Mennonite, Quakers, etc. to refuse to involve themselves in civil courts or anything that might unnecessarily entangle them with the civil court system. They took
I Corinthians 6:1-8 very seriously. These groups actually won the right not to take any oath in court, and to only affirm the truth if forced by law to testify. They even won the right to maintain their hats in the courtroom and in some cases not to rise when the judge entered the chamber. These Christians took their separation very seriously, and their position was quite controversial at the time in some instances. So, it can be more than a mere ideological statement. For some, it can be a core NT doctrine relating to the Christian's relationship with the systems of this world.
Very true. Couples who take the path of government free marriage need to do their homework and realize what limitations their union will have. For example, they cannot file their taxes jointly. Nor can they take advantage of any tax breaks for married couples. Since the state doesn't recognize their union, they must file their taxes as individuals. In addition, they should establish all durable and medical powers of attorney to give one another legal authority over one another's finances and medical. In addition, they should have all wills properly written out, in detail, with proper witness signatures, notarized, and filed with the court. Cohabitation agreements can also establish terms and conditions for various aspects of each of the above. It takes a little more homework, paperwork, and footwork than the rubber stamp provision of civil marriage... but for many couples who wish to manage their own lives and issues privately, it is necessary to secure various rights and protections. A government free marriage is very different from just "shacking up". There is a bit more paperwork involved than most have to worry about who seek a civil marriage.
For many libertarian types and those who have experienced real or perceived injustices in the divorce courts, this gives individual couples more control over their unions, assets, and even their divorces.
Threaded Mode
