The quorum court meeting on July 31 ended with a discussion of the morality of same-sex marriages.
At the end of each meeting, justices of the peace have an opportunity to comment on items not appearing on the agenda. JP Don McNeely said he has heard legal advice suggesting that a JP who performs weddings can be sued if he refuses to marry a same-sex couple. In Arkansas, JPs have the authority to perform weddings, although they are not required to exercise that authority. If they do marry opposite-sex couples, however, they cannot discriminate against same-sex couples.
McNeely said he would prefer not to officiate at a same-sex wedding, although he might find a way to separate his public role from his personal convictions. He mentioned someone he knew in a similar position, who felt the sin involved would only attach to the sinners, not to the official.
McNeely noted that the couple who contacted him had already been turned down by several other JPs. “It’s kind of a shame,” he said.
JP Larry Swofford said another JP had previously checked on this issue. According to an opinion from the Arkansas Attorney General, JPs can choose to marry everyone, or they can decide not to officiate at weddings.
JP Harrie Farrow, who represents Eureka Springs, said she was “very uncomfortable using these JP comments to talk about what sin might be.” She also took issue with conducting an off-agenda discussion during the comments period.
McNeely had invited other JPs into the conversation, asking how many of them would officiate at a wedding. The quorum court has long-standing procedural rules about only discussing items appearing on the agenda. JPs have an opportunity to amend the agenda at the start of a meeting, but that requires a unanimous vote.