Interracial couple denied marriage license

[Dr.Who]

Racism is racism, whether it is black against white, vice versa, or some combination.

I agree, except that objecting to interracial marriage might not be racism. It might still be stupid.

If one thought that children of interracial marriages would suffer unduly one might object to those marriages and not do so out of any belief whatsoever that blacks or whites are inferior or superior or different in any meaningful way. I don't buy the argument but it is not racism.

In this case it was not a white discriminating against a black it was a judge who happened to be white discriminating against both a man and a woman who happened to be black and white. Race was a factor but not in the normal way. A black judge could have reached the same conclusion (wrongly) as no doubt many blacks have been against interracial marriage.

In fact, according to this Gallup poll 10% of blacks do not approve of interracial marriage.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/28417/Most-Americans-Approve-Interracial-Marriages.aspx

 

[PLC1]

I agree, except that objecting to interracial marriage might not be racism. It might still be stupid.

If one thought that children of interracial marriages would suffer unduly one might object to those marriages and not do so out of any belief whatsoever that blacks or whites are inferior or superior or different in any meaningful way. I don't buy the argument but it is not racism.

In this case it was not a white discriminating against a black it was a judge who happened to be white discriminating against both a man and a woman who happened to be black and white. Race was a factor but not in the normal way. A black judge could have reached the same conclusion (wrongly) as no doubt many blacks have been against interracial marriage.

In fact, according to this Gallup poll 10% of blacks do not approve of interracial marriage.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/28417/Most-Americans-Approve-Interracial-Marriages.aspx

Of course, not everyone of any race is going to approve of interracial marriages.

Whether or not children of mixed race "suffer unduly" depends almost entirely on the attitudes of the society in which they live. Fifty years ago, they would have suffered.

The trend, from your poll, is pretty clear:

. In 1958, only 4% of Americans said they approved of marriages between whites and blacks. (The precise wording of the Gallup question has changed across the decades as the commonly accepted descriptive terms for blacks have changed; when Gallup first asked the question in 1958, the poll wording was, "whites and non-whites.") Approval gradually increased over the next few decades, but at least half of Americans disapproved of black-white unions through 1983. Then, in the next measure eight years later, disapproval had fallen to 42%, with 48% approving. In 1997, the next time Gallup asked the question, approval had jumped well into the majority, with nearly two in three Americans saying they approved of marriages between blacks and whites. Disapproval fell to 27% in that same year. Support remained at about the two-thirds level until 2002, but increased to 73% in 2003. Since then, there have only been modest variations in attitudes about interracial marriages.

From that, I would conclude that racism is far and away less prevalent than it was 50 years ago. I knew that already, though, since I can remember how things were at that time.

My sister dated a black man for a time back in the late '60s, and caused quite a stir, particularly among my parents. Being children of the '20s and '30s, they referred to the boyfriend as a "son of Cain." His parents had similar feelings as well.

Attitudes have indeed changed, and for the better IMO.

 

[Dr.Who]

From that, I would conclude that racism is far and away less prevalent than it was 50 years ago. I knew that already, though, since I can remember how things were at that time.

Whatever part of the objection to interracial marriage is due to racism and has declined would cause objections to interracial marriage to decline too.

But if people object to interracial marriage based on other factors then that would not be effected by changes in the amount of racism.

 

[Dr.Who]

Attitudes have indeed changed, and for the better IMO.

I agree. Based on my experience I would have thought that objections to interracial marriage would have been far less than the poll indicates.

Either racism IS more prevalent than I would have thought or some significant number of the people in that poll object to interracial marriage for reasons other than racism.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I thought it was clear that I made it up.

That way some here, having assumed he was white, would stop and realize their own biases. Why did you quote the OP and insert a word that was not there? (because you went elsewhere to find that) Why do you think it would be odd for a black man to make the statement about having black friends? Don't lots of blacks have black friends? And then consider this statement:

"Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said."

Anyway, it does not really matter if he was black or white for purposes of that post. It matters that many assumed he was white. Did they also assume he was a Democrat? Because he was when he formed his views and then changed parties in 2008. (So it also sounds like his party allegiance is not based on lasting principles.) He has been denying interracial marriages for many years and now that he is a Republican people suddenly care. Why didn't anyone complain when he was a racist Democrat?

And which person in the bridal party was discriminated against?

I did not insert any word to that at all, what are you talking about?

I belived he was white...due to the report that I read saying he was white...I know, odd of me to do so.

and as for saying, I have lots of black friends....that's like a guy saying I don't mean to sound racist....its a sure fire sign something racist is about to come out of there mouth. A black man would not use having black friends as proof he was not racist...is that simple, the report said he was white, I believed that based on the report he was white, and he is white...so not sure your point

 

[AtheismIsReality]

Look away. Look away. Look away. Dixieland.

 

[Dr.Who]

I did not insert any word to that at all, what are you talking about?

I belived he was white...due to the report that I read saying he was white...I know, odd of me to do so.

and as for saying, I have lots of black friends....that's like a guy saying I don't mean to sound racist....its a sure fire sign something racist is about to come out of there mouth. A black man would not use having black friends as proof he was not racist...is that simple, the report said he was white, I believed that based on the report he was white, and he is white...so not sure your point

The OP did not say he was white. Anyone reading you quote with no link would assume it was from the OP when in fact you found it somewhere else.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

The OP did not say he was white. Anyone reading you quote with no link would assume it was from the OP when in fact you found it somewhere else.

I copy pasted the damn thing right off the website .

http://www.startribune.com/nation/64425477.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiacyKUzyaP37D_MDua_eyD5PcOiUr

my local newspaper, go ahead and read it...then you can feel free to say you where wrong and I was right and I of course did know he was white because because in fact it said so.

 

[always]

Look away. Look away. Look away. Dixieland.

A radical leftist wanted to marry a horse.We said why not?, Mixed marriages are quite the thing now. We issued the license but when we saw the bride we called PETA!!

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I copy pasted the damn thing right off the website .

http://www.startribune.com/nation/64425477.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiacyKUzyaP37D_MDua_eyD5PcOiUr

my local newspaper, go ahead and read it...then you can feel free to say you where wrong and I was right and I of course did know he was white because because in fact it said so.

I too have seen articles where the Justice of the Peace is listed as being white.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

A radical leftist wanted to marry a horse.We said why not?, Mixed marriages are quite the thing now. We issued the license but when we saw the bride we called PETA!!

This has to be one of the most intellectually challenged posts you have ever inflicted on the good people on this site. I can understand that you may different political values than some on HOP, but this kind of tripe makes you look asinine.

 

[Dr.Who]

I copy pasted the damn thing right off the website .

http://www.startribune.com/nation/64425477.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiacyKUzyaP37D_MDua_eyD5PcOiUr

my local newspaper, go ahead and read it...then you can feel free to say you where wrong and I was right and I of course did know he was white because because in fact it said so.

This was the quote in the OP:

"NEW ORLEANS – A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have."

This was the quote you provided:

"A white Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have."

You did not provide a link at the time.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

This was the quote in the OP:

"NEW ORLEANS – A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have."

This was the quote you provided:

"A white Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have."

You did not provide a link at the time.

so clearly I must be lying and making things up, could not possibly that I quoted something else ....you tried to make a point about assuming things...yet looks like it was you who assumed, and was wrong..Next time maybe you can just trust that I dont make crap up and fake quotes..

 

[PLC1]

Let's settle the somewhat absurd and irrelevant debate about the race of the justice of the peace in question. Take a look at this article, play the video, (or just look at the picture), then decide for yourself.

 

[Dr.Who]

so clearly I must be lying and making things up, could not possibly that I quoted something else ....you tried to make a point about assuming things...yet looks like it was you who assumed, and was wrong..Next time maybe you can just trust that I dont make crap up and fake quotes..

I hope you can step back for a moment. I did not mean to make any statement about you character.

I never thought you made anything up or that you made a fake quote. I said so right away that you must have used another source.

But because your other source used almost the identical words as the OP and since you did not provide a link many of the readers would think that you were quoting from the OP. Then they would think I was wrong when I said that we (we here on this thread who were reading the OP) did not know the race of the judge. You knew the race but the rest of us did not.

go back to post 11 and see if did not imply that I should have read that quote and known the answer. I could not have read the quote you put there because it was not in the OP. You brought it in after the fact and did not provide a link.

One might think that you expected my to assume that your quote was from the OP and that I missed the obvious fact.