On 06-Jan-09 1:12, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:41:51 +0100, andrel wrote:
> 
>> On 06-Jan-09 0:33, Jim Henderson wrote:
[]
>>> If I wanted rights in those other states and/or countries, yes.  My
>>> marriage is in fact a civil marriage (we did not have a religious
>>> ceremony), so it already is.
>> does that mean you have one or the other? Here civil is required
>> religious is an extra option with no real consequences (although my
>> parents only celebrated the religious one and considered the civil one a
>> superfluous extra)
> 
> Here in the US, a civil marriage is required.  A religious marriage is 
> optional.  In most cases, you get get both at the same time by being 
> married by clergy.  A justice of the peace (JP - aka a "judge") cannot 
> generally perform a religious marriage.  So pretty much the same here as 
> there.

Clergy here can not do a civil marriage, so that is different. My 
parents married in the church more than 5 months after their civil 
marriage. I don't know how (un)common that was in those days.

Post a reply to this message