Will ADF Defend the Louisiana Official Who Refuses to Marry Interracial Couples?
October 16, 2009
Remember six months ago when lesbians and gays were first allowed to marry in Iowa? One aspect I didn’t bring up here was the legal brawl started by the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), the legal arm of the Religious Right (co-founded by James Dobson).
Their position was that no county official should have to perform marriages that s/he didn’t personally approve of. Here’s a bit of the letter (pdf) they sent out to all Iowa County Recorders on April 22, 2009, five days before the new standard went into effect (emphasis from original):
One of the most foundational rights and liberties we enjoy as Iowans is the right of conscience, as evidenced by Iowa Code §146.1. This right is based upon the simple truth that it is wrong to force anyone to violate his or her conscience.
… Therefore, the Iowa Family Policy Center and the Alliance Defense Fund propose that the following language be adopted by your office and each of Iowa’s 99 County Recorders.
The Alliance Defense Fund will defend this policy language and will provide free legal review and defense if this policy is challenged on the basis of its content.
POLICY:An individual who may lawfully perform services for or provide services to the [NAME] County Recorder’s office shall not be required to issue or process a marriage license, or to perform, assist, or participate in such procedures, against that individual’s religious beliefs or moral convictions. A person shall not discriminate against any individual in any way, including but not limited to employment, promotion, advancement, transfer, licensing, education, training, or the granting of employment privileges or conditions, because of the individual’s participation in or refusal to participate in the issuance of a marriage license.
Iowa Code § 146.1, by the way, turns out to be the Iowa law that says doctors don’t have to perform abortions if it is against their conscience (“religious beliefs or moral convictions). In fact, the wording from the ADF’s proposal is taken directly from § 146.1.
* * *
By now most people have heard of the Louisiana Justice of the Peace Keith Bardwell, who refused last Tuesday to marry an interracial straight couple because “I just don’t believe in mixing the races that way.” From the AP article via Huffington Post:
“I’m not a racist. I just don’t believe in mixing the races that way,” Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. “I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else.”
Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said. Bardwell estimates that he has refused to marry about four couples during his career, all in the past 2 1/2 years.
Beth Humphrey, 30, and 32-year-old Terence McKay, both of Hammond, say they will consult the U.S. Justice Department about filing a discrimination complaint.
“I’ve been a justice of the peace for 34 years and I don’t think I’ve mistreated anybody,” Bardwell said. “I’ve made some mistakes, but you have to. I didn’t tell this couple they couldn’t get married. I just told them I wouldn’t do it.”
Read more at huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/15/interracial-couple-denied_n_322784.html
And a bit more from the Hammond, Louisiana local paper:
Bardwell said from his experience, “99 percent of the time” the interracial couple consists of a black man and white woman. “I find that rather confusing,” he said.
“I don’t do interracial marriages because I don’t want to put children in a situation they didn’t bring on themselves,” Bardwell said. “In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer.”
Bardwell said a justice of the peace is not required to conduct a marriage ceremony and is at liberty to recuse himself “from a marriage or anything else.” He said the state attorney general told him years ago that he would eventually get into trouble for not performing interracial marriages.
“I told him if I do, I’ll resign,” Bardwell said. “I have rights too. I’m not obligated to do that just because I’m a justice of the peace.”
Read more at: hammondstar.com/articles/2009/10/16/top_stories/8847.txt
It seems to me, based on their position in April, that the ADF is duty- and honor-bound to defend Mr. Bardwell. ADF agrees with him that his conscience should exempt him from having to perform a legal marriage.
They called this “one of the most foundational rights and liberties” in April, and though they were referencing Iowa law, Louisiana Code §1299.35.9 says exactly the same thing.
And since we know that ADF is aware of this law (they sent out an “Alliance Alert” in July celebrating the law’s expansion), I bet they’re on the phone with Mr. Bardwell as I type.
Unless, of course, they’re afraid of the backlash they’d get for defending a racist man like they have another brand of bigot in exactly the same scenario.
(Please read the comment tips before joining the conversation.)
Because obviously all children from interracial marriages will suffer from many mental problems and have an appalling life because their parents aren't both white.
Wait, why am I happy with my life then?
Because obviously all children from interracial marriages will suffer from many mental problems and have an appalling life because their parents aren't both white.
Wait, why am I happy with my life then?
Excellent story Matt. These are exactly the types of inconsistencies and hypocrisies that need to be pointed out as we demand full equality.
http://thomascwaters.com
I say then…why stop at inter-racial couples…
Under this code, it's feasible for these officials to not perform marriages for poor people because they feel morally obligated to not participate in this poor straight or gay couples joining and bringing a child into the world that they cannot support financially…
Or not perform marriages for people with certain inheritable diseases because it's morally wrong to allow condone this couple to participate in procreation because they are continuing a bad gene…
Or not perform marriages for those who do not believe in your religion since it would mean they would be bringing children and raising them not believing in your own religion and hence would be in essence condemning them to hell…
It's the kind of law that sooner or later could be twisted around to bite those people who created this law back in their a**.
I say then…why stop at inter-racial couples…
Under this code, it's feasible for these officials to not perform marriages for poor people because they feel morally obligated to not participate in this poor straight or gay couples joining and bringing a child into the world that they cannot support financially…
Or not perform marriages for people with certain inheritable diseases because it's morally wrong to allow condone this couple to participate in procreation because they are continuing a bad gene…
Or not perform marriages for those who do not believe in your religion since it would mean they would be bringing children and raising them not believing in your own religion and hence would be in essence condemning them to hell…
It's the kind of law that sooner or later could be twisted around to bite those people who created this law back in their a**.