Anti-Gay Groups, State Lawmaker Goad Iowa's Public Servants to Refuse Gay Couples Marriage Licenses

An Iowa state lawmaker has allegedly joined anti-gay groups in encouraging county recorders to defy the law and refuse same-sex couples marriage certificates--a charge that, if true, could lead to penalties being imposed on the lawmaker in question.

In Iowa, judges are free to decline to perform marriage services if they so wish, though it is expected that if they do refuse to preside over weddings, they will not do so selectively, marrying heterosexuals and not gay couples, or the other way around.

However, state recorders do not have the option of granting marriage licenses or withholding them based on their personal beliefs or opinions; like other public servants, they are requited to carry out their job duties in a professional manner.

Marriage for gay and lesbian Iowa families is expected to commence April 27.

According to an April 24 article at the Chicago Tribune, Republican Iowa state Sen. Merlin Bartz has been accused by a former state lawmaker, Ed Fallon, of attempting to incite refusal to grant marriage licenses to gay couples, despite marriage equality now being a matter of law in Iowa.

Citing the oath of office, in which individuals assuming positions in state government swear to uphold the law, Fallon said, "It's really important that state lawmakers respect their oath of office and we have really serious questions about whether that's happening in this case."

The article said that Fallon, who had been a state Rep. and a candidate for the governorship of Iowa in the past, cited Bartz's had support for a petition calling on county recorders to refuse marriage licenses to gay and lesbian families.

The petition was being promoted by anti-gay group the Iowa Family Policy Center, the article said.

Fallon referenced the oath, saying, "We shall obey and encourage people to obey and support the laws of this state.

"This clearly seems to be inconsistent with that," said Fallon of Bartz's alleged conduct.

Bartz struck back at Fallon, telling the press that, "We're doing a little research to see if that is a pattern by ex-Representative Fallon."

In addition to questioning Bartz's support of the petition, Fallon also posed questions about whether taxpayer money was going toward a Web resource supporting the effort to coax county recorders to flaunt the law. Fallon said that the individuals listed as contacts at the site are also staffers who are paid out of public funds.

Said Bartz, "The petition that I have offered is an opportunity for the people of the state of Iowa to honor their ability to petition their government and address grievances.

"Those petitions are being signed by people across the state," Bartz claimed.

The article reported that Iowa Senate President Jack Kibbie, a Democrat, had said he would convene the Ethics Committee, which Kibbie leads, to look into the matter.

Meantime, county recorders have been reminded about their job duties by the state's attorney general, according to an April 24 article at anti-gay Web site WorldNetDaily

Tom Miller, the state's AG, reportedly posted a message online reading, "If necessary, we will explore legal actions to enforce and implement the court's ruling, working with the Iowa Dept. of Public Health and county attorneys."

Miller also reminded public employees that, "A county registrar should furnish the forms in the same manner as in opposite gender applications."

Miller exhorted county recorders to follow the rule of law. "We must live by and follow what the courts decide," his posting reportedly read.

Anti-gay group the Alliance Defense Fund, which provides support to Christian groups fighting inclusive laws and policies in court, reportedly joined the Iowa Family Council in sending out letters to county recorders encouraging them to defy the law, citing "the right of conscience," the article said.

The letter added, "This right is based upon the simple truth that it is wrong to force anyone to violate his or her conscience," and advocates the adoption by counties of local laws allowing county recorders to opt out of serving gay and lesbian members of the public if doing so contradicts their religious convictions.

The letter provides sample language for such local laws, the article reported, reading, in part, "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."

The article quoted an Alliance Defense Fund lawyer, Doug Napier, who said, "This policy allows an employee who does not wish to violate his or her own conscience by issuing a marriage license to a same-sex couple to abstain and allow the transaction to be performed by someone who is willing to do it."

Napier suggested that requiring a public employee to carry out his or her job duties when the job conflicts with personal religious convictions would be "unconstitutional."

Napier added, "Contrary to the threatening statement issued by Attorney General Tom Miller on April 21, the citizens of Iowa enjoy the protections of the right of conscience guaranteed in the U.S. and Iowa constitutions--the very constitutions that county recorders swore to uphold when taking office."

Such hypothetical guarantees protecting public servants' personal beliefs evidently do not extend to court justices; Napier attacked the court finding that struck down as unconstitutional a state law barring marriage equality, accusing the justices of "overrul[ing] the will of the people and creat[ing] new law."

As many who wish to see marriage equality eliminated or blocked have done, Napier called for the rights of gay and lesbian families to be put to popular vote, the article reported.

The article went on to refer to last year's deeply divisive and enormously expensive battle in California, which culminated in a narrow majority of voters approving a ballot initiative that rescinded marriage rights for non-heterosexual families, throwing into doubt the status of 18,000 married couples.