This Weird Marriage Law Sounds Fake But Is Actually Real

People get married every day but it's safe to say that most people don't have a collective consciousness of all the laws ever created, let alone the laws pertaining to marriage. And to make matters all the more difficult, these rules can vary from state to state.

There are, however, some laws that are the same across the board such as those against polygamy and marrying a relative, which is illegal in all states. Though not always enforced. And then there used to be laws that barred marriage between people of different races and the same-sex. The Supreme Court outlawed the former in 1967, and the latter in 2015 (via History). As we move towards a more modern world, a lot of laws have changed to adapt. Still, there are some laws that remain on the books that most people don't know about. And some of them are so bizarre they don't even sound like they're actually real and existing.

Take common-law marriages, for instance. They are not recognized in every state, surprisingly, and Nebraska for example is just one of many states that just doesn't accept it, unless it was done before 1923, per their website. You can get married in the Cornhusker state at 17 years old with parental consent and must be 19 to get married without. Sounds all basic right? But as you keep going it gets interesting.

One Nebraska marriage law says that you cannot get hitched there if you have a sexually transmitted disease (STD). It states: "...No person who is afflicted with a venereal disease shall marry in this state."

Today, venereal disease is referred to and known as STDs (or STIs). The prohibition of marriage for someone who has an STD has been a law in the state since 1944. In a case called Christensen V. Christensen (via Caselaw Access Project), a husband sought to end his marriage with his wife and cited his own diagnosis as grounds for divorce. The marriage was ruled void, and the apparent intention of the law is to protect unknowing parties from the disease and to prevent the spread of it. When you think about this law, it begs the question: how exactly it has stayed on the books for decades without there also being a coinciding law requesting documents for proof?