It certainly been a week of "What the!! ?" In Louisiana an interracial was told they couldn't marry because the JP who was going to marry them said he "Didn't really believe in mixed marriages" (no offense of course) and told them to go somewhere else to do it. He also wanted to remind everyone that he indeed "Is not a racist... just don't think the races should mix". Why is it alwasys the people who aren't racist seem to always do the racist things lol.
You always hope that this nation can have a smart discussion about gay marriage, but it's so sad that something that you would think was universally accepted like interracial marriage in this nation is still being discriminated by people in power.
Interracial marriage denied
Moderator: Super Moderators
Re: Interracial marriage denied
OMG wrote:
You always hope that this nation can have a smart discussion about gay marriage, but it's so sad that something that you would think was universally accepted like interracial marriage in this nation is still being discriminated by people in power.
--
Excellently stated, OMG!
The Justice of the Peace was acting improperly as well as illegally. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is rightly seeking his removal from office because of this.
Snip:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/17/mckay.folo/
The Supreme Court struck down laws against interracial marriage in the landmark 1967 Loving v. Virginia case. Richard and Mildred Loving, who got married in Washington, D.C., were arrested in their Virginia home with their marriage license framed and hanging on the wall, for the simple fact of being husband and wife.
In the unanimous decision, the Supreme Court said that "Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the state."
---
See also:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/g ... 88&invol=1
U.S. Supreme Court
LOVING v. VIRGINIA, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)
388 U.S. 1
LOVING ET UX. v. VIRGINIA.
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA.
No. 395.
Argued April 10, 1967.
Decided June 12, 1967.
Last edited by racehorse on 10-18-2009 02:10 AM, edited 1 time in total.
racehorse
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/16/louisi ... index.html
Governor calls for firing of justice in interracial marriage case
updated 12:23 a.m. EDT, Sat October 17, 2009
HAMMOND, Louisiana (CNN) -- The actions of a justice of the peace in Louisiana who refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple have prompted some top officials, including Gov. Bobby Jindal, to call for his dismissal.
Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay say they were denied a marriage license because of their race.
Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay say they were denied a marriage license because of their race.
Jindal said the state judiciary committee should review the incident in which Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace for Tangipahoa Parish's 8th Ward, refused to issue a marriage license to Beth Humphrey, 30, and her boyfriend, Terence McKay, 32, both of Hammond.
"This is a clear violation of constitutional rights and federal and state law. ... Disciplinary action should be taken immediately -- including the revoking of his license," the Republican governor said.
Sen. Mary L. Landrieu, D-Louisiana, said the committee should "use its authority to have Justice Bardwell dismissed from his position."
"Not only does [Bardwell's] decision directly contradict Supreme Court rulings, it is an example of the ugly bigotry that divided our country for too long," she said. Video Watch Terence McKay react to the denial of a marriage license »
Bardwell has not returned repeated calls from CNN this week.
However, Bardwell told Hammond's Daily Star in a story published Thursday that he was concerned for the children who might be born of the relationship and that, in his experience, most interracial marriages don't last.
"I'm not a racist," Bardwell told the newspaper. "I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house. My main concern is for the children."
Bardwell, stressing that he couldn't personally endorse the marriage, said his wife referred the couple to another justice of the peace.
The bride says the case boils down to discrimination.
Humphrey said on Thursday that she called Bardwell on October 6 to ask about getting a marriage license, and was asked by his wife whether it would be an interracial marriage. Humphrey said she was told that Bardwell does not sign off on interracial marriages.
She said the couple, who received their marriage license October 9 from another justice of the peace in the same parish, have reached out to an attorney to determine their next step.
"We would like him to resign," she said. "He doesn't believe he's being racist, but it is racist."
Patricia Morris, president of the NAACP branch of Tangipahoa Parish said her NAACP chapter has forwarded the case to the state and national levels of the civil rights group.
"He's an elected public official and one of his duties is to marry people. He doesn't have the right to say he doesn't believe in it," Morris said Thursday. "If he doesn't do what his position calls for him to do, he should resign from that position."
advertisement
According to the Census Bureau, Tangipahoa Parish is about 70 percent white and 30 percent black.
The U.S. Supreme Court tossed out any racially based limitations on marriage in the landmark 1967 Loving v. Virginia case. In the unanimous decision, the court said that "Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the state."
Governor calls for firing of justice in interracial marriage case
updated 12:23 a.m. EDT, Sat October 17, 2009
HAMMOND, Louisiana (CNN) -- The actions of a justice of the peace in Louisiana who refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple have prompted some top officials, including Gov. Bobby Jindal, to call for his dismissal.
Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay say they were denied a marriage license because of their race.
Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay say they were denied a marriage license because of their race.
Jindal said the state judiciary committee should review the incident in which Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace for Tangipahoa Parish's 8th Ward, refused to issue a marriage license to Beth Humphrey, 30, and her boyfriend, Terence McKay, 32, both of Hammond.
"This is a clear violation of constitutional rights and federal and state law. ... Disciplinary action should be taken immediately -- including the revoking of his license," the Republican governor said.
Sen. Mary L. Landrieu, D-Louisiana, said the committee should "use its authority to have Justice Bardwell dismissed from his position."
"Not only does [Bardwell's] decision directly contradict Supreme Court rulings, it is an example of the ugly bigotry that divided our country for too long," she said. Video Watch Terence McKay react to the denial of a marriage license »
Bardwell has not returned repeated calls from CNN this week.
However, Bardwell told Hammond's Daily Star in a story published Thursday that he was concerned for the children who might be born of the relationship and that, in his experience, most interracial marriages don't last.
"I'm not a racist," Bardwell told the newspaper. "I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house. My main concern is for the children."
Bardwell, stressing that he couldn't personally endorse the marriage, said his wife referred the couple to another justice of the peace.
The bride says the case boils down to discrimination.
Humphrey said on Thursday that she called Bardwell on October 6 to ask about getting a marriage license, and was asked by his wife whether it would be an interracial marriage. Humphrey said she was told that Bardwell does not sign off on interracial marriages.
She said the couple, who received their marriage license October 9 from another justice of the peace in the same parish, have reached out to an attorney to determine their next step.
"We would like him to resign," she said. "He doesn't believe he's being racist, but it is racist."
Patricia Morris, president of the NAACP branch of Tangipahoa Parish said her NAACP chapter has forwarded the case to the state and national levels of the civil rights group.
"He's an elected public official and one of his duties is to marry people. He doesn't have the right to say he doesn't believe in it," Morris said Thursday. "If he doesn't do what his position calls for him to do, he should resign from that position."
advertisement
According to the Census Bureau, Tangipahoa Parish is about 70 percent white and 30 percent black.
The U.S. Supreme Court tossed out any racially based limitations on marriage in the landmark 1967 Loving v. Virginia case. In the unanimous decision, the court said that "Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the state."
racehorse
-
Bobbi Snow
- Pirate
- Posts: 2366
- Joined: 01-20-2008 01:57 PM
How is the JP's "convictions" about the mixed race marriage and subsequent children any different from people who work in drugs stores--from the janitors on up through the ranks to and including the pharmacists who oppose birth control and abortion? You know... those people--the ones who, in some states, can deny the stores' from stocking and dispensing pills that prevent pregnancy as well as pills that prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the wall of the uterus? And then there are the ones who live in states wherein HIV/AIDS drugs cannot be sold to ill or dying people because if the gays and those who associated with them sexually are infected, they've gotten what they deserve...
To people opposed to certain kinds of others' actions because they wouldn't do it themselves, and wouldn't want to have their consciences condemned by participating in something(s) so vile to their own beliefs, preventing interracial marriage and preventing pregnancies or selling life-saving drugs is the same kind of Soul Sin.
There is no counseling and no therapy for those people. They were born into homes wherein this kind of stoic belief is far worse than any religion. Those kinds of people will probably never be totally eradicated from our society, and that is indeed sad. We can write all the Laws we want... it's not going to change their minds, and it's not going to stop them from breeding and raising their own little racists/bigots/equality deniers.
To people opposed to certain kinds of others' actions because they wouldn't do it themselves, and wouldn't want to have their consciences condemned by participating in something(s) so vile to their own beliefs, preventing interracial marriage and preventing pregnancies or selling life-saving drugs is the same kind of Soul Sin.
There is no counseling and no therapy for those people. They were born into homes wherein this kind of stoic belief is far worse than any religion. Those kinds of people will probably never be totally eradicated from our society, and that is indeed sad. We can write all the Laws we want... it's not going to change their minds, and it's not going to stop them from breeding and raising their own little racists/bigots/equality deniers.
If you're still breathing, it's not too late!Bobbi Snow wrote: How is the JP's "convictions" about the mixed race marriage and subsequent children any different from people who work in drugs stores--from the janitors on up through the ranks to and including the pharmacists who oppose birth control and abortion? You know... those people--the ones who, in some states, can deny the stores' from stocking and dispensing pills that prevent pregnancy as well as pills that prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the wall of the uterus? And then there are the ones who live in states wherein HIV/AIDS drugs cannot be sold to ill or dying people because if the gays and those who associated with them sexually are infected, they've gotten what they deserve...
To people opposed to certain kinds of others' actions because they wouldn't do it themselves, and wouldn't want to have their consciences condemned by participating in something(s) so vile to their own beliefs, preventing interracial marriage and preventing pregnancies or selling life-saving drugs is the same kind of Soul Sin.
There is no counseling and no therapy for those people. They were born into homes wherein this kind of stoic belief is far worse than any religion. Those kinds of people will probably never be totally eradicated from our society, and that is indeed sad. We can write all the Laws we want... it's not going to change their minds, and it's not going to stop them from breeding and raising their own little racists/bigots/equality deniers.
"Those kinds of people will probably never be totally eradicated from our society, and that is indeed sad."
This statement and the one about breeders is in my opinion, a dangerous statement. What the JP did is flat-out wrong, However talking about eradicating a group of people based on their beliefs is very dangerous and has historical precedence. I get your anger though.
In a democratic society, people have the right to choose what they want and the right to do it as long as it is within the law. At least in my understanding. The First Amendment allows me to believe whatever I may believe as long as my actions do not prohibit the free actions of another, correct? (racehorse correct me if I'm wrong here.) So, if I believe that my God knew me while I was being formed in the womb it would have some significance for this dumb hick. Therefore I'd look at things differently.
I'd have to agree to disagree on a few areas, but I'd still have to do my job though. Or get a new line of work that doesn't conflict with my beliefs.On Topic. Outside the womb. The JP needs to be replaced. He is violating the civil rights of that couple. IMHO
-
Bobbi Snow
- Pirate
- Posts: 2366
- Joined: 01-20-2008 01:57 PM
What I'm posing here, vigo, is the same kind of bias. People want to inflict their own prejudices on others who do not feel the same way.
I agree... if they don't like what their lines of work do, then they should look for other jobs. But unfortunately, in some states the Laws allow their bias to become Law, and then it's inflicted on others who also should have a freedom of choise that is denied to them. Like the couple wanting to get married. Like the woman who was raped and wanted the Morning After Pill but no drug store would sell it to her in her county. Like the women who either NEED the abortion pill because being pregnant is a life threatening condition, and they must drive 150 miles to find a drug store who will sell the pills to them. Like the women who are trying to be responsible for their bodies, and are not allowed to buy birth control because they're having sex outside of marriage which they don't believe is wrong, or because they are not ready to conceive, even if they ARE in a marriage.
There ARE states who restrict women's rights; there are states and places that restrict (judge) the opinions of others "for the sake of subsequent children"... and the ones who believe this comes from Jesus or God who takes precedent over the Laws of the Land; these are the ones to whom I refer.
I personally don't believe in the Death penalty, but I do not stand watch outside any prisons when someone is about to be executed. I don't believe a whole lot of Laws in affect today are correct, but I don't picket or judge the rights of the ones who DO... I only judge whether or not someone has the right the break the Law in order to pacify his/her own beliefs.
While there is a time and place to march together to voice an opinion against what a large group feels is an unfair/prejudiced Law, I don't think they need to break other Laws to achieve their goal of making their voices heard.
I agree... if they don't like what their lines of work do, then they should look for other jobs. But unfortunately, in some states the Laws allow their bias to become Law, and then it's inflicted on others who also should have a freedom of choise that is denied to them. Like the couple wanting to get married. Like the woman who was raped and wanted the Morning After Pill but no drug store would sell it to her in her county. Like the women who either NEED the abortion pill because being pregnant is a life threatening condition, and they must drive 150 miles to find a drug store who will sell the pills to them. Like the women who are trying to be responsible for their bodies, and are not allowed to buy birth control because they're having sex outside of marriage which they don't believe is wrong, or because they are not ready to conceive, even if they ARE in a marriage.
There ARE states who restrict women's rights; there are states and places that restrict (judge) the opinions of others "for the sake of subsequent children"... and the ones who believe this comes from Jesus or God who takes precedent over the Laws of the Land; these are the ones to whom I refer.
I personally don't believe in the Death penalty, but I do not stand watch outside any prisons when someone is about to be executed. I don't believe a whole lot of Laws in affect today are correct, but I don't picket or judge the rights of the ones who DO... I only judge whether or not someone has the right the break the Law in order to pacify his/her own beliefs.
While there is a time and place to march together to voice an opinion against what a large group feels is an unfair/prejudiced Law, I don't think they need to break other Laws to achieve their goal of making their voices heard.
If you're still breathing, it's not too late!