RSS Feed
Print Story
E-mail Story
Gay marriage: Is county clerk heroine or villain?
| Friday, Jun 6 2008 7:35 PM
Last Updated: Monday, Jun 9 2008 9:14 AM
Ann K. Barnett’s decision to halt all civil marriage ceremonies performed by her county office has prompted a barrage of opinion, with supporters applauding her for “doing the will of the people” while critics say her personal beliefs are preventing her from doing her job.
BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS:
Loading Stories
Advertisement
Photos:
Auditor-Controller Ann Barnett is shown in this 2006 file photo.
Still others don’t know what to make of Barnett’s motives because she hasn’t said much on the matter.
Only marriage licenses will be granted by the county clerk’s office, Auditor-Controller-County Clerk Barnett announced last week, following a court decision upholding gay marriage. Information on where to wed would still be given to newly licensed couples.
In news release issued Wednesday, she said the reasons for discontinuing the ceremonies were lack of space and staff as well as budgetary, administrative and security considerations.
But were these the only reasons?
A Californian investigation found that Barnett repeatedly tried to get out of licensing and performing same-sex marriages. Among other things, she tried resigning from some of her duties, had a county attorney file a brief opposing implementation of the court’s ruling and sought legal protection from a religiously conservative, anti-gay marriage organization.
The Californian talked to several members of the community to determine whether they think Barnett is carrying out the will of the people who elected her, or letting her personal beliefs get in the way of her duty to offer low-cost marriage ceremonies.
Reactions varied from sympathetic to critical and were filled with a lot of speculation about what Barnett really thinks.
“I feel that she does believe that she is doing the will of the people by not offering same-sex marriage because Prop. 22 (also called the California Defense of Marriage Act, which was voted into law in 2000) was clearly passed in the state of California and that was the mandate to her at the time that she was elected from the people,” said Jean Fuller, assemblymember for the 32nd District.
“If she tried to make the case that she’s fulfilling the will of her constituency because of the strong support for Prop. 22, that would be fallacious reasoning on her part,” said Christopher Meyers, director of the Kegley Institute of Ethics at CSUB.
“She would have to do either a separate survey or a separate election on whether the duly elected county clerk may use his or her religious judgment rather than following the existing state law.”
WHOSE LAW TO FOLLOW?
“It seems clear that she is following the technical letter of the law” regarding the suspension of ceremonies, which Barnett is not required to perform, Meyers said. “Now, just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s right.”
But opponents of gay marriage use that same argument against a practice they consider morally wrong.
Samantha Levy is the wife of the pastor of In Him Praise and Worship Center and the coordinator of the Bakersfield Christian Parade, which took place in early May.
“My heart does go out to her,” Levy said about Barnett. “I pray that she’ll have the strength to do what God tells her to do and that she’ll be a woman who walks by faith and not by sight.”
AVOIDING SPECULATION
Until Barnett makes her feelings known, the jury is still out for some, including California 18th District State Sen. Roy Ashburn, who is opposed to gay marriage.
“It would be pure speculation to say that she is canceling marriage ceremonies totally on her personal beliefs or values. I would call on her to explain it. I think that where we stand right now is something where she owes more explanation.”
Telephone messages left for Barnett on Friday were not returned.
THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE VS. THE LAW
“I believe she is following the dictates of her conscience and her beliefs, but I believe she is taking incredible liberties with the laws as they’re given to her,” said Miles Johnson, 33, of Bakersfield, himself a county employee domestically partnered for the last four years with Stephen Cowan, 56, an educator.
“I cannot deny that she is trying to be a principled leader,” Johnson said of Barnett. “But her job, honestly, is not to carry out the will of the people: Her job is to carry out the law of the people.
“There has been a lot of debate about Prop. 22 and if it passed by such a wide margin, that must be the will of the people. But the will of the people put our Supreme Court justices in the position to be able to question the constitutionality of that proposition.”
Doyle Schroeder, 47, lives in Massachusetts now but he grew up in Bakersfield. He was married to Ric Faust, 44, four years ago, he said. The two have been together 11 years.
Schroeder said that, like Barnett, there were some public servants in Massachusetts who initially recoiled at the idea of having to marry gay couples but “overall they decided to fulfill their duty with respect and dignity.”
“I think that her personal beliefs got in the way of doing what her civil duty is,” he said of Barnett. “I think she’s a good person.
“I wish she would respectfully reconsider this and that she would go back to offering low cost marriages regardless of the gender because there are still people who need this service in the county,” Schroeder said.
But Fuller said Barnett has offered some “sound” budgetary reasons for stopping marriage ceremonies at a time when the state budget is in crisis.
Also, “the costs (for performing more marriages) are likely to increase as a result of this ruling and therefore be above what is currently budgeted now. As the elected leader, she would be required to adjust her budget,” Fuller said. “The logical conclusion would be to cut the service out since she cannot parcel it out so that she gives it to some and not to others.”