Here in Louisiana things are often a little more than backwards. Recently, a justice of the peace refused to marry an interracial couple based on nothing more than his personal opinion.
Keith Bardwell, a white justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish in
southeastern Louisiana, wouldn't issue a license to or preside over the
nuptials for Beth Humphrey, who is white, and Terence McKay, of
Hammond, La., who is black.
The two were later married by another area justice of the peace.
Bardwell, who's held his post more than 30 years, said he refused
to perform the ceremony because of his concern for the future of the
couple's children.
Nice, huh? To his credit, Gov. Jindal and other state officials have called for Bardwell's head. But, David Vitter was slow to make a statement about the issue and when he did he simply stated that judges should follow the law and did not go as far as Jindal or Mary Landrieu in calling for the JP's removal. I guess the question that is popping up in people's minds is whether Vitter's refusal to go as far as Jindal, et. al. is tantamount to condoning the JP's actions or the sentiments that motivated them. But, shouldn't his statement that judges should follow the law be enough to show that he thinks there's been a wrongdoing? I'm no fan of Vitter, but the absence of a call for his removal is not exactly the same as condoning the judge's actions. Although perhaps it does raise the question of why he did not go that far.
Recent Comments