It’s hard to imagine that the voters of Ohio’s 64th House District sent State Representative Tom Letson (D) to Columbus to tinker with our marriage law, but that hasn’t stopped him from introducing perhaps the least necessary marriage law in memory.

House Bill 63, if adopted, would authorize the 132 members of the Ohio General Assembly to perform civil marriages.  Exactly what need does this address?

Certainly it isn’t hard to get married.  Presently civil marriages can be performed by a judge of any county, municipal or probate court in the state, as well as the mayor of any municipal corporation.  Hell, even the superintendent of the state school for the deaf can perform civil marriages. 

How does it improve the institution of marriage to add legislators to the long list of officiants already on the books?  It doesn’t.  It does have the potential, however, to further politicize an institution already loaded with it by the continuing debate over whether civil marriages ought to be available to same-sex couples.

Since the law only authorizes but does not obligate legislators to perform these marriages, they retain the right to refuse.  This permits legislators to apply their own religious, social or cultural limitations on the marriages they will perform.  Non-Christian?  No.  Pregnant teen?  No.  Foreign-born?  No.  Of non-childbearing age?  No.  Of the other political party?  No.  Racially mixed couple?  No.  Of the same sex?  Hell no.

Can you imagine the lawsuits or public relations nightmares that might result from a refusal?

Of course a legislator who applies no filter to the marriages he will perform runs the risk of acting in a way his or her constituents would not approve.  This just becomes another of the criteria voters will use to assess the performance of their legislator. 

It’s possible that, properly organized in the right district, voters could elect a legislator that is prepared to make a political issue of some minority opinion regarding marriage.  A legislator might perform such marriages in order to legitimize this minority view as did the mayor of New Paltz, New York in 2004.

What if some rogue legislator chooses to perform marriages of same-sex couples?  What if he or she opts to wed young girls to middle-aged husbands ala Warren Jeffs?  What if some maverick legislator comfortable with polygamy marries one man to many wives?  How can the legitimacy of such marriages be challenged if they bear the endorsement of someone who is addressed as ”The Honorable?”

The legal knots into which marriage would be tied would certainly not be good for this institution.

The politicization of marriage has already produced troublesome outcomes that are no good for the government, the church or the community they serve.  This legislation would only make a bad situation worse.