One of the reasons institutional bigotry is so ingrained and hard to weed out, is that the people who perpetuate it most think they are above the law. Because the law was mostly meant for people like them, not ‘those other people.’ Also, civil rights were especially designed for them, and if expressing theirs oppresses yours, well tough . Even if they are a judge, a social services employee, a police officer, a court clerk — it doesn’t matter if their job demands that they treat you equally, their right to voice personal objections to your cultural differences trump everything else.

And if they’re in a position to try and change the law, to give them even more freedom to take freedom from others, more the better. So now your boss’ religious views get to dictate what kind of medical coverage they’re required to provide to you, and it’s not even against the law. It’s massively irrational and unconstitutional, but it’s legal.

This case is just more of the same. The defense can’t be bothered to even defend their actions — because they know fully well that their actions are illegal. Instead they’re going to ask a higher court to basically give them carte blanche to take any children they want, under any circumstances they choose, without oversight, accountability or any semblance of unbiased behavior. Abuses like this are a big part of why many Americans don’t trust the family court systems — especially if they are members of groups who are most often treated with bigotry by our legal system, like ethnic/racial minorities, people who aren’t hetero-normative, people who aren’t in mainstream (or any) religions, the poor, the disabled, etc..