Yes, Bardwell, Refusing to Marry Interracial Couples Is Racist

Kathy -

You know this. I repeat it because others may not. I was raised the product of what, in the day, was a mixed marriage. Raised by my grandparents, grandfather Jewish, grandmother Dutch Reform fundamentalist. Growing up in a first/second generation Italian Catholic neighborhood, when I wasn't being called "Jew-boy", I was called "half breed". My grandparents resolved their "problem" by becoming devout athiests.

Bardwell is correct. It does have an effect on the children. The effect on me was to take incredible pride in the courage of my family to face, sometimes ignore and most times defy prejudice. No, it may not be the same as a bi-racial marriage, and the prejudice may be mild in comparison, but I will never doubt that I am a stronger and more principled person because of my grandparents' scandalous "mixed marriage".

My grandfather believed that he was part American Indian for most of his youth, until a close relative informed him that he was really Italian. I've always found the idea of racial purity to be a little strange, especially the "one drop" concept, considering how much mixing has been going on through the centuries. I doubt that anyone could concretely devise a definition of purity that wouldn't either break everyone off into their own individual group, or end up putting everyone into one group. Thankfully, the idea that we are all slightly different variations of human (created equal, anyone?) seems to be taking hold.

You are absolutely correct, Kathy!
(I'm not used to saying those words)

He has the right to feel that way, even if he's wrong - it's America.
He does NOT however have the right to enforce racial purity in an official capacity in a governmental position. I'm glad Bobby Jindal had him resign.

But you know darn well that this kind of thing will rear its head when JOPs are asked to perform same sex unions, right? I would refuse as a Justice of the Peace since it would violate my faith. Would I then be asked to resign? Probably. Would I? Nope. They'd have to take me in front of the Supreme Court. And I'm sure it will be there soon.

Very well said, tidbits.

I am glad this idiot has resigned. A lifelong Democrat, he switched parties when the Democrats nominated Obama. Good for Bobbie Jindal for disabusing him of the notion that Republicans would tolerate this kind of racist behavior and giving him a strong push out of office.

It might be racism, but not necessarily. His stated motive is that he believes children are worse off. That is wrong, but not necessarily racist. Or his motive might be racism and the argument about the children is just a cover. Motive is a difficult thing to prove.

In any case, regardless of whether it is racism, it certainly is discriminatory by definition. If the black man who was marrying the white woman, for example, had been white, he would have performed the marriage. Therefore, the JOP is discriminating based on race, regardless of whether this motive is racism or not. So I’m glad he stepped down.

I disagree with you, JeffersonDavis. If I were a JOP and I disapproved a particular classification of marriage that was legal in my state, I think it would be my duty to step down and let someone else fill that role. The best I could do would be to make my resignation a form of protest, but I don’t think it would be right to continue to fill the office and deny my services to those who legally qualify.

JD -

You went back to a photo! I was just getting used to the flag which, btw, you explained very well when I asked about it.

Thought you and adelinesdad both made good points about standing on principal and "protesting", though in different ways. You already know that you and I disagree on gay marriage, but I respect your principles. Back in the 1930's, when my grandparents were married, their were many who would have refused to perform that marriage. I wonder if 80 years from now the dispute about gay marriage will still be an issue or just a dusty memory from history.

Tidbits,

Thanks for the kind words. From you, that means a lot.

In many ways, our nation can mature and grow to eliminate hatred and bias. Racism, sexism, agism, ethnicism, etc.... should be eliminated. But we have to guard against culturism - or the total neglect of our culture. Yes, cultures change, as well they should. It's healthy for a civilization. But time after time, the elements of humanism take and take a portion of our culture away in the name of "freedom". I maintain that humanism is not the cornerstone of our culture. I'm quite certain most agree with me on that. But I will fight to not only keep a "Godly" element within our culture and government; but also fight to bring our nation back to its Constitutional roots politically, fiscally, and diplomatically.

I pray that we still have an America 80 years from now. On our present course, I believe it won't be. I could be wrong.