I'm about to get crucified, but I'll state my peace anyway. I support marriages of any sort. Mixed race, same sex, whatever. But I don't see how this guy can be labelled a racist. He doesn't think that races should mix. He's not saying that one is better than the other. He just thinks each race should stay pure. There are actually many studies that show how children of mixed race suffer emotionally with not being able to indentify themselves with any specific heritage/race. I don't know why. I personally couldn't give two shits of my mixed heritage (I'm a European mutt-Irish, Scottish, English), but hey, maybe colour is the issue. I don't know. I'd have to look up those studies again.
I disagree with him, but I don't think he is a racist. That's a bit strong of a word.
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I'm about to get crucified, but I'll state my peace anyway. I support marriages of any sort. Mixed race, same sex, whatever. But I don't see how this guy can be labelled a racist. He doesn't think that races should mix. He's not saying that one is better than the other. He just thinks each race should stay pure. There are actually many studies that show how children of mixed race suffer emotionally with not being able to indentify themselves with any specific heritage/race. I don't know why. I personally couldn't give two shits of my mixed heritage (I'm a European mutt-Irish, Scottish, English), but hey, maybe colour is the issue. I don't know. I'd have to look up those studies again.
I disagree with him, but I don't think he is a racist. That's a bit strong of a word.
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
The whole basis behind the KKK is excatly this "Every race should stay pure " ?? you don't believe this makes him a racist i might be wrong but i defently belive he is one ....
I'm about to get crucified, but I'll state my peace anyway. I support marriages of any sort. Mixed race, same sex, whatever. But I don't see how this guy can be labelled a racist. He doesn't think that races should mix. He's not saying that one is better than the other. He just thinks each race should stay pure. There are actually many studies that show how children of mixed race suffer emotionally with not being able to indentify themselves with any specific heritage/race. I don't know why. I personally couldn't give two shits of my mixed heritage (I'm a European mutt-Irish, Scottish, English), but hey, maybe colour is the issue. I don't know. I'd have to look up those studies again.
I disagree with him, but I don't think he is a racist. That's a bit strong of a word.
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
The whole basis behind the KKK is excatly this "Every race should stay pure " ?? you don't believe this makes him a racist i might be wrong but i defently belive he is one ....
I believe it was the white race they wanted to remain pure. Not all races. Did they give a shit if an Asian married and had children with an African? I don't think so. That's the difference here, in my opinion.
And remember, he has "piles and piles of black friends".
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
let me just clear something up......I think this man is ignorant, but I still wouldn't call him a racist. I mean, who gives a shit about so-called racial purity? I don't. Not many do. He's on a slippery slope, but I don't think he's at the bottom of the hill.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
I'll not go into your views.
In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed state prohibitions against interracial marriage. Therefore, interracial marriages have been permissible in all 50 states for over 40 years. That's one of the reasons why this man's actions are so shocking. It's not as if the law just changed and he's not exactly up to speed. He says he's been a justice of the peace for 34 years. Well, if this is how he's been doing things, then he hasn't been upholding the law as he was elected to.
I read in another article that before being issued a marriage license in Louisiana a couple are supposed to prove that they are eligible to be married. OK, no surprise. They are asked if they've been married before, if so, how long ago was the marriage dissolved, and to provide proof of that. I assume they may also have to provide proof that they are of age. Other than that, there are no "eligibility" requirements.
It's certainly not against the law to be an asshole. This man can believe whatever he wants about who should and shouldn't marry. If he doesn't think that Irish should marry Italians, he's entitled to his opinions. But if he's elected to a public office he can't decide to impose his beliefs on others. It's like the police deciding to pick and choose which laws to enforce. If he can't treat all citizens the same he's in the wrong profession.
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
I'll not go into your views.
In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed state prohibitions against interracial marriage. Therefore, interracial marriages have been permissible in all 50 states for over 40 years. That's one of the reasons why this man's actions are so shocking. It's not as if the law just changed and he's not exactly up to speed. He says he's been a justice of the peace for 34 years. Well, if this is how he's been doing things, then he hasn't been upholding the law as he was elected to.
I read in another article that before being issued a marriage license in Louisiana a couple are supposed to prove that they are eligible to be married. OK, no surprise. They are asked if they've been married before, if so, how long ago was the marriage dissolved, and to provide proof of that. I assume they may also have to provide proof that they are of age. Other than that, there are no "eligibility" requirements.
It's certainly not against the law to be an asshole. This man can believe whatever he wants about who should and shouldn't marry. If he doesn't think that Irish should marry Italians, he's entitled to his opinions. But if he's elected to a public office he can't decide to impose his beliefs on others. It's like the police deciding to pick and choose which laws to enforce. If he can't treat all citizens the same he's in the wrong profession.
You'll not go into my views? what does that mean exactly? that you are well within your right to jump the gun and judge this man based on a knee-jerk reaction? I won't do that, personally. I prefer all the facts before I judge someone's actions.
Like I said, I think the guy's an idiot, but I didn't know if what he did was legally wrong. That's all I was saying.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
0
Options
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,126
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
I'll not go into your views.
In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed state prohibitions against interracial marriage. Therefore, interracial marriages have been permissible in all 50 states for over 40 years. That's one of the reasons why this man's actions are so shocking. It's not as if the law just changed and he's not exactly up to speed. He says he's been a justice of the peace for 34 years. Well, if this is how he's been doing things, then he hasn't been upholding the law as he was elected to.
I read in another article that before being issued a marriage license in Louisiana a couple are supposed to prove that they are eligible to be married. OK, no surprise. They are asked if they've been married before, if so, how long ago was the marriage dissolved, and to provide proof of that. I assume they may also have to provide proof that they are of age. Other than that, there are no "eligibility" requirements.
It's certainly not against the law to be an asshole. This man can believe whatever he wants about who should and shouldn't marry. If he doesn't think that Irish should marry Italians, he's entitled to his opinions. But if he's elected to a public office he can't decide to impose his beliefs on others. It's like the police deciding to pick and choose which laws to enforce. If he can't treat all citizens the same he's in the wrong profession.
You'll not go into my views? what does that mean exactly? that you are well within your right to jump the gun and judge this man based on a knee-jerk reaction? I won't do that, personally. I prefer all the facts before I judge someone's actions.
Like I said, I think the guy's an idiot, but I didn't know if what he did was legally wrong. That's all I was saying.
You can bet what he did was illegal and he should know he's a judge. Give a listen here at the 50 second mark
There was no knee jerk reaction here and what he did was racist, how would you feel if that was you who was denied the RIGHT to get married? Would you feel some sort of racism was perpetrated against you and would you sue him?
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Interracial couple denied marriage license in La.
By MARY FOSTER, Associated Press Writer Mary Foster, Associated Press Writer Fri Oct 16, 4:50 am ET
NEW ORLEANS – 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.
Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.
"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."
Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.
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.
"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell said. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."
If he did an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said.
"I try to treat everyone equally," he said.
Bardwell estimates that he has refused to marry about four couples during his career, all in the past 2 1/2 years.
Beth Humphrey, 30, and 32-year-old Terence McKay, both of Hammond, say they will consult the U.S. Justice Department about filing a discrimination complaint.
Humphrey, an account manager for a marketing firm, said she and McKay, a welder, just returned to Louisiana. She is white and he is black. She plans to enroll in the University of New Orleans to pursue a masters degree in minority politics.
"That was one thing that made this so unbelievable," she said. "It's not something you expect in this day and age."
Humphrey said she called Bardwell on Oct. 6 to inquire about getting a marriage license signed. She says Bardwell's wife told her that Bardwell will not sign marriage licenses for interracial couples. Bardwell suggested the couple go to another justice of the peace in the parish who agreed to marry them.
"We are looking forward to having children," Humphrey said. "And all our friends and co-workers have been very supportive. Except for this, we're typical happy newlyweds."
"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzmann. She said the Supreme Court ruled in 1967 "that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."
The ACLU sent a letter to the Louisiana Judiciary Committee, which oversees the state justices of the peace, asking them to investigate Bardwell and recommending "the most severe sanctions available, because such blatant bigotry poses a substantial threat of serious harm to the administration of justice."
"He knew he was breaking the law, but continued to do it," Schwartzmann said.
According to the clerk of court's office, application for a marriage license must be made three days before the ceremony because there is a 72-hour waiting period. The applicants are asked if they have previously been married. If so, they must show how the marriage ended, such as divorce.
Other than that, all they need is a birth certificate and Social Security card.
The license fee is $35, and the license must be signed by a Louisiana minister, justice of the peace or judge. The original is returned to the clerk's office.
"I've been a justice of the peace for 34 years and I don't think I've mistreated anybody," Bardwell said. "I've made some mistakes, but you have too. I didn't tell this couple they couldn't get married. I just told them I wouldn't do it."
this man does know who your president is doesnt he???
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
There was no knee jerk reaction here and what he did was racist, how would you feel if that was you who was denied the RIGHT to get married? Would you feel some sort of racism was perpetrated against you and would you sue him?
Peace
I didn't know you spoke for whoprincess. :roll:
I'd be outraged, but I'd move on. I certainly would NOT sue the man. I'm getting really tired of this "let's sue" mentality. It's quite disgusting.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
tell me this folks. this is not exclusive to white people. I know of many different races/creeds/religions that "encourage" their fellow people to marry only their own "kind". Italians, blacks, Jews, whites, Asians, you name it. Are you calling all these people racists and bigots because they'd personally rather their offspring marry into their own heritage? They don't give a shit if they are friends with these people, they just wish to keep the family bloodline the same. Again, I don't agree with this, but it's not my right to tell them it's not theirs.
To each their own, I say. But I don't call it racism.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
0
Options
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,126
tell me this folks. this is not exclusive to white people. I know of many different races/creeds/religions that "encourage" their fellow people to marry only their own "kind". Italians, blacks, Jews, whites, Asians, you name it. Are you calling all these people racists and bigots because they'd personally rather their offspring marry into their own heritage? They don't give a shit if they are friends with these people, they just wish to keep the family bloodline the same. Again, I don't agree with this, but it's not my right to tell them it's not theirs.
To each their own, I say. But I don't call it racism.
I don't speak for whoprincess. One difference with your example above and the case we speak of, this man is a city official and a judge at that. What one does in their own home and heritage is another issue totally different when he works and is paid my the city. He has no authority to impose his beliefs and deny those rights to the citizens of that city.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
tell me this folks. this is not exclusive to white people. I know of many different races/creeds/religions that "encourage" their fellow people to marry only their own "kind". Italians, blacks, Jews, whites, Asians, you name it. Are you calling all these people racists and bigots because they'd personally rather their offspring marry into their own heritage? They don't give a shit if they are friends with these people, they just wish to keep the family bloodline the same. Again, I don't agree with this, but it's not my right to tell them it's not theirs.
To each their own, I say. But I don't call it racism.
heres my own personal problem. my father was adopted as an infant. i have no clue about anything in regards to his side of the family. there are issues that im dealing with and i have only 50% reference. when my maternal side has been ruled out where do i go??? i could go with the white thing but thatd just make me look like a fool when theres a possibility that my fathers family are mixed race. as far as im concerned my own kind is all humanity.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
tell me this folks. this is not exclusive to white people. I know of many different races/creeds/religions that "encourage" their fellow people to marry only their own "kind". Italians, blacks, Jews, whites, Asians, you name it. Are you calling all these people racists and bigots because they'd personally rather their offspring marry into their own heritage? They don't give a shit if they are friends with these people, they just wish to keep the family bloodline the same. Again, I don't agree with this, but it's not my right to tell them it's not theirs.
To each their own, I say. But I don't call it racism.
tell me this folks. this is not exclusive to white people. I know of many different races/creeds/religions that "encourage" their fellow people to marry only their own "kind". Italians, blacks, Jews, whites, Asians, you name it. Are you calling all these people racists and bigots because they'd personally rather their offspring marry into their own heritage? They don't give a shit if they are friends with these people, they just wish to keep the family bloodline the same. Again, I don't agree with this, but it's not my right to tell them it's not theirs.
To each their own, I say. But I don't call it racism.
I was thinking the same thing..
this man doesnt have the right to deny this mixed couple marriage based solely on that. thats the problem we all have with it. in his official capacity hes bound to marry a couple simply because they want to marry and tis within the law surely.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
personally. I prefer all the facts before I judge someone's actions.
Now there's an :idea: to bad more people don't think like that...
how many more facts do you need.
the fact is, that as a Justice of the Peace, he has absolutely no authority to decide that a biracial couple can't be married.
there are no OTHER facts.
no need to get cheeky. I live in Canada. I have no idea what kind of authority a JP has or doesn't have in his particular jurisdiction. As I said in an earlier post, if he did something that was outside of his authority then he should be fired. No question. But that wasn't really the issue here, was it? Everyone was calling him a racist, which I don't believe he is. He was wrong, but not a racist.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Now there's an :idea: to bad more people don't think like that...
how many more facts do you need.
the fact is, that as a Justice of the Peace, he has absolutely no authority to decide that a biracial couple can't be married.
there are no OTHER facts.
no need to get cheeky. I live in Canada. I have no idea what kind of authority a JP has or doesn't have in his particular jurisdiction. As I said in an earlier post, if he did something that was outside of his authority then he should be fired. No question. But that wasn't really the issue here, was it? Everyone was calling him a racist, which I don't believe he is. He was wrong, but not a racist.
do you not see that if both were white or both black hed not have had a problem??? the fact is he wouldnt marry them cause they werent the same race. THAT my friend is racism.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
actually.........Racism is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
nowhere in this guy's objection to marrying an interracial couple do I see the above. He says NOTHING about the character of either one of the people wanting to get married, does he? Nor does he say anything about superiority of either race. Get a grip people.
Look at the definition and tell me what he did was racism. What he did was WRONG, but it wasn't racism. Sorry folks, but you are misdefining what racism is.
If I like Asian women over white women, does that mean I'm racist? If I prefer white women over Asian women, am I racist? To you people, in both instances, I am. And that's ridiculous. It's personal preference, not a superiority complex. Jeez. :roll:
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
do you not see that if both were white or both black hed not have had a problem??? the fact is he wouldnt marry them cause they werent the same race. THAT my friend is racism.
yes, I do see that. And no, it's not. Why? Because of his intent. He does not believe (from what he says) that he objects to them getting married because it will breed an inferior child, or that blacks are inferior to whites so they shouldn't combine, he says that the child might have some indentity issues and not be accepted by either race. To me that says compassion. It's misguided compassion to be sure, but it's still compassion.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
do you not see that if both were white or both black hed not have had a problem??? the fact is he wouldnt marry them cause they werent the same race. THAT my friend is racism.
yes, I do see that. And no, it's not. Why? Because of his intent. He does not believe (from what he says) that he objects to them getting married because it will breed an inferior child, or that blacks are inferior to whites so they shouldn't combine, he says that the child might have some indentity issues and not be accepted by either race. To me that says compassion. It's misguided compassion to be sure, but it's still compassion.
excuses excuses.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
I'll not go into your views.
In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed state prohibitions against interracial marriage. Therefore, interracial marriages have been permissible in all 50 states for over 40 years. That's one of the reasons why this man's actions are so shocking. It's not as if the law just changed and he's not exactly up to speed. He says he's been a justice of the peace for 34 years. Well, if this is how he's been doing things, then he hasn't been upholding the law as he was elected to.
I read in another article that before being issued a marriage license in Louisiana a couple are supposed to prove that they are eligible to be married. OK, no surprise. They are asked if they've been married before, if so, how long ago was the marriage dissolved, and to provide proof of that. I assume they may also have to provide proof that they are of age. Other than that, there are no "eligibility" requirements.
It's certainly not against the law to be an asshole. This man can believe whatever he wants about who should and shouldn't marry. If he doesn't think that Irish should marry Italians, he's entitled to his opinions. But if he's elected to a public office he can't decide to impose his beliefs on others. It's like the police deciding to pick and choose which laws to enforce. If he can't treat all citizens the same he's in the wrong profession.
You'll not go into my views? what does that mean exactly? that you are well within your right to jump the gun and judge this man based on a knee-jerk reaction? I won't do that, personally. I prefer all the facts before I judge someone's actions.
Like I said, I think the guy's an idiot, but I didn't know if what he did was legally wrong. That's all I was saying.
:roll:
I simply meant that I was neither interested in "crucifying" (as you put it) nor complimenting you for your beliefs as you'd expressed them or getting into a debate about racism with you. I was more interested in answering your question about whether or not the justice of the peace in the news story could LEGALLY refuse to issue a marriage license to the couple because of his personal opinions. Which was what I tried to do in my post, but you seem to have missed that because you were busy accusing me of judging him "on a knee-jerk reaction."
Yes, I think his behavior and comments are boorish, low down, backwards, tasteless and completely uncalled for in this day and age, all the more so because he's an elected official. But I think you you are the one who "jumped the gun" in reacting to my post.
actually.........Racism is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
nowhere in this guy's objection to marrying an interracial couple do I see the above. He says NOTHING about the character of either one of the people wanting to get married, does he? Nor does he say anything about superiority of either race. Get a grip people.
Look at the definition and tell me what he did was racism. What he did was WRONG, but it wasn't racism. Sorry folks, but you are misdefining what racism is.
If I like Asian women over white women, does that mean I'm racist? If I prefer white women over Asian women, am I racist? To you people, in both instances, I am. And that's ridiculous. It's personal preference, not a superiority complex. Jeez. :roll:
actually.... you are wrong. Racism is not ONLY the belief that one race is superior to another but also the belief that race accounts for differences in human character. His assumption was that children from a mixed family will suffer more than the average children. This means he already has a preconceived belief regarding the characters of people from different races. Thats no better than people who cross the street because an african-american or middle-eastern guy was approaching from the other direction.
0
Options
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,126
This JP forms part of the US government, and the official published position of the US government, based upon real life statistics, is that the chances of this White woman being beaten or killed by her Black husband are 6 to 7 times higher than if she married a White man.
The chance of her children being abused or killed by a Black father is also 6 to 7 times higher than if they had a White father.
More than half of all the men in prison in the US are Black, yet Black men only make up 5 percent of the population. A quarter of all Black men go to prison, so there is a 1 in 4 chance this White woman, and her children, will have a convicted criminal as a husband and father.
The average IQ of Blacks is 15 to 25 points below that of Whites, so a White woman having children with a Black man will have children with IQs 15 to 20 points less than what they could have been.
Unemployment amongst Black men is far higher than White men, so there is also a much higher chance of her children living in poverty than if she married a White man.
No one has been able to show what advantages there are for the White woman or her children to having a Black father, when compared to the many advantages they would have if they had a White father.
This i found from one of the posters while reading up on this case. Maybe this is what Keith Bardwell was driving at when he spoke of *being concerned about marrying mixed couples and the children they may have* something to that effect.
Well in my experience quite the opposite has happened I know of a black mother has committed adultery, twice married, failed to pay her back child support and has abused her child.
On the other hand i know of a white man who dropped out of high school, fathered 4 children, failed to find work in 15 years, became a drug dealer, spent 2+ years in jail, currently unemployed, abused his now ex-wife and failed and continues to fail paying child support of $100 a month for 2 children yes that's right and it's true.
My point here as I've said before is K Bardwell's preconceived position of assumptions are racist and a form of straight up racism. Being a public official a judge hired to serve ALL citizens of the public regardless of what his beliefs or assumptions of people are. He does not have that authority or the right to impose that on the public because in this case his assumptions are totally wrong.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
actually.........Racism is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
nowhere in this guy's objection to marrying an interracial couple do I see the above. He says NOTHING about the character of either one of the people wanting to get married, does he? Nor does he say anything about superiority of either race. Get a grip people.
Look at the definition and tell me what he did was racism. What he did was WRONG, but it wasn't racism. Sorry folks, but you are misdefining what racism is.
If I like Asian women over white women, does that mean I'm racist? If I prefer white women over Asian women, am I racist? To you people, in both instances, I am. And that's ridiculous. It's personal preference, not a superiority complex. Jeez. :roll:
actually.... you are wrong. Racism is not ONLY the belief that one race is superior to another but also the belief that race accounts for differences in human character. His assumption was that children from a mixed family will suffer more than the average children. This means he already has a preconceived belief regarding the characters of people from different races. Thats no better than people who cross the street because an african-american or middle-eastern guy was approaching from the other direction.
no, I'm not wrong. Neither are you. they are both definitions of racism. However, you take a giant leap here. Yes, he is assuming that children from a mixed family will suffer more than the average child. So then you jump over the grand canyon by making the claim that this means he has a preconceived belief regarding the characters of other races? Where did that come from? He is merely stating that they suffer because of identity crisis, on both sides. He's not saying that "those poor white kids are going to think they are black", he is saying all kids of mixed race suffer indentity crises. And that's arguable, but not racism.
People are way too quick to jump the gun and throw around all these nasty terms for people who have any supposedly politically incorrect opinion.
Let me ask you this: if this situation had been exactly the same, except for one point, that the JP was black instead of white, would you all be calling him racist? I bet not. You can't have it both ways.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I simply meant that I was neither interested in "crucifying" (as you put it) nor complimenting you for your beliefs as you'd expressed them or getting into a debate about racism with you. I was more interested in answering your question about whether or not the justice of the peace in the news story could LEGALLY refuse to issue a marriage license to the couple because of his personal opinions. Which was what I tried to do in my post, but you seem to have missed that because you were busy accusing me of judging him "on a knee-jerk reaction."
Yes, I think his behavior and comments are boorish, low down, backwards, tasteless and completely uncalled for in this day and age, all the more so because he's an elected official. But I think you you are the one who "jumped the gun" in reacting to my post.
My apologies then. Yes, I did read your entire post. I thought you were being dismissive with your opening comment, which you say you were not, and for that I am sorry that I misjudged what you meant.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
and I'll say again. Many of you have given me the facts that I had asked. He was indeed acting outside of his authority, and therefor illegally. So he should absolutely be fired. Case closed.
But sued? I find that a bit overkill. What is the obsession with sueing people these days? It's gotten ridiculous. "hey, you pissed me off, you owe me money!". I never understood the correlation between someone being "wronged" and giving them money for compensation, when finances never came into the equation in the first place.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
no, I'm not wrong. Neither are you. they are both definitions of racism. However, you take a giant leap here. Yes, he is assuming that children from a mixed family will suffer more than the average child. So then you jump over the grand canyon by making the claim that this means he has a preconceived belief regarding the characters of other races? Where did that come from? He is merely stating that they suffer because of identity crisis, on both sides. He's not saying that "those poor white kids are going to think they are black", he is saying all kids of mixed race suffer indentity crises. And that's arguable, but not racism.
People are way too quick to jump the gun and throw around all these nasty terms for people who have any supposedly politically incorrect opinion.
Let me ask you this: if this situation had been exactly the same, except for one point, that the JP was black instead of white, would you all be calling him racist? I bet not. You can't have it both ways.
yes i would.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Comments
I disagree with him, but I don't think he is a racist. That's a bit strong of a word.
And it all depends on his lincense. Is he required to marry anyone that applies to do so? Or does he have any sort of discretion? We should ask that before we call for this guy to be fired. If he's required to perform all legal marriages in his practicing state, then damn right he should get canned.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
The whole basis behind the KKK is excatly this "Every race should stay pure " ?? you don't believe this makes him a racist i might be wrong but i defently belive he is one ....
I believe it was the white race they wanted to remain pure. Not all races. Did they give a shit if an Asian married and had children with an African? I don't think so. That's the difference here, in my opinion.
And remember, he has "piles and piles of black friends".
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
In 1967 the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed state prohibitions against interracial marriage. Therefore, interracial marriages have been permissible in all 50 states for over 40 years. That's one of the reasons why this man's actions are so shocking. It's not as if the law just changed and he's not exactly up to speed. He says he's been a justice of the peace for 34 years. Well, if this is how he's been doing things, then he hasn't been upholding the law as he was elected to.
I read in another article that before being issued a marriage license in Louisiana a couple are supposed to prove that they are eligible to be married. OK, no surprise. They are asked if they've been married before, if so, how long ago was the marriage dissolved, and to provide proof of that. I assume they may also have to provide proof that they are of age. Other than that, there are no "eligibility" requirements.
It's certainly not against the law to be an asshole. This man can believe whatever he wants about who should and shouldn't marry. If he doesn't think that Irish should marry Italians, he's entitled to his opinions. But if he's elected to a public office he can't decide to impose his beliefs on others. It's like the police deciding to pick and choose which laws to enforce. If he can't treat all citizens the same he's in the wrong profession.
You'll not go into my views? what does that mean exactly? that you are well within your right to jump the gun and judge this man based on a knee-jerk reaction? I won't do that, personally. I prefer all the facts before I judge someone's actions.
Like I said, I think the guy's an idiot, but I didn't know if what he did was legally wrong. That's all I was saying.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
You can bet what he did was illegal and he should know he's a judge. Give a listen here at the 50 second mark
Louisiana judge denies marriage certificates for interracial couples
There was no knee jerk reaction here and what he did was racist, how would you feel if that was you who was denied the RIGHT to get married? Would you feel some sort of racism was perpetrated against you and would you sue him?
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
this man does know who your president is doesnt he???
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I didn't know you spoke for whoprincess. :roll:
I'd be outraged, but I'd move on. I certainly would NOT sue the man. I'm getting really tired of this "let's sue" mentality. It's quite disgusting.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
To each their own, I say. But I don't call it racism.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I don't speak for whoprincess. One difference with your example above and the case we speak of, this man is a city official and a judge at that. What one does in their own home and heritage is another issue totally different when he works and is paid my the city. He has no authority to impose his beliefs and deny those rights to the citizens of that city.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
heres my own personal problem. my father was adopted as an infant. i have no clue about anything in regards to his side of the family. there are issues that im dealing with and i have only 50% reference. when my maternal side has been ruled out where do i go??? i could go with the white thing but thatd just make me look like a fool when theres a possibility that my fathers family are mixed race. as far as im concerned my own kind is all humanity.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Now there's an :idea: to bad more people don't think like that...
I was thinking the same thing..
this man doesnt have the right to deny this mixed couple marriage based solely on that. thats the problem we all have with it. in his official capacity hes bound to marry a couple simply because they want to marry and tis within the law surely.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Of course not..
the fact is, that as a Justice of the Peace, he has absolutely no authority to decide that a biracial couple can't be married.
there are no OTHER facts.
no need to get cheeky. I live in Canada. I have no idea what kind of authority a JP has or doesn't have in his particular jurisdiction. As I said in an earlier post, if he did something that was outside of his authority then he should be fired. No question. But that wasn't really the issue here, was it? Everyone was calling him a racist, which I don't believe he is. He was wrong, but not a racist.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
n.
3. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character
Edit: And what the fuck is a bloodline? If we go by this train of thought humans should still be fucking apes.
nowhere in this guy's objection to marrying an interracial couple do I see the above. He says NOTHING about the character of either one of the people wanting to get married, does he? Nor does he say anything about superiority of either race. Get a grip people.
Look at the definition and tell me what he did was racism. What he did was WRONG, but it wasn't racism. Sorry folks, but you are misdefining what racism is.
If I like Asian women over white women, does that mean I'm racist? If I prefer white women over Asian women, am I racist? To you people, in both instances, I am. And that's ridiculous. It's personal preference, not a superiority complex. Jeez. :roll:
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
yes, I do see that. And no, it's not. Why? Because of his intent. He does not believe (from what he says) that he objects to them getting married because it will breed an inferior child, or that blacks are inferior to whites so they shouldn't combine, he says that the child might have some indentity issues and not be accepted by either race. To me that says compassion. It's misguided compassion to be sure, but it's still compassion.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
excuses excuses.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I simply meant that I was neither interested in "crucifying" (as you put it) nor complimenting you for your beliefs as you'd expressed them or getting into a debate about racism with you. I was more interested in answering your question about whether or not the justice of the peace in the news story could LEGALLY refuse to issue a marriage license to the couple because of his personal opinions. Which was what I tried to do in my post, but you seem to have missed that because you were busy accusing me of judging him "on a knee-jerk reaction."
Yes, I think his behavior and comments are boorish, low down, backwards, tasteless and completely uncalled for in this day and age, all the more so because he's an elected official. But I think you you are the one who "jumped the gun" in reacting to my post.
actually.... you are wrong. Racism is not ONLY the belief that one race is superior to another but also the belief that race accounts for differences in human character. His assumption was that children from a mixed family will suffer more than the average children. This means he already has a preconceived belief regarding the characters of people from different races. Thats no better than people who cross the street because an african-american or middle-eastern guy was approaching from the other direction.
This i found from one of the posters while reading up on this case. Maybe this is what Keith Bardwell was driving at when he spoke of *being concerned about marrying mixed couples and the children they may have* something to that effect.
Well in my experience quite the opposite has happened I know of a black mother has committed adultery, twice married, failed to pay her back child support and has abused her child.
On the other hand i know of a white man who dropped out of high school, fathered 4 children, failed to find work in 15 years, became a drug dealer, spent 2+ years in jail, currently unemployed, abused his now ex-wife and failed and continues to fail paying child support of $100 a month for 2 children yes that's right and it's true.
My point here as I've said before is K Bardwell's preconceived position of assumptions are racist and a form of straight up racism. Being a public official a judge hired to serve ALL citizens of the public regardless of what his beliefs or assumptions of people are. He does not have that authority or the right to impose that on the public because in this case his assumptions are totally wrong.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
no, I'm not wrong. Neither are you. they are both definitions of racism. However, you take a giant leap here. Yes, he is assuming that children from a mixed family will suffer more than the average child. So then you jump over the grand canyon by making the claim that this means he has a preconceived belief regarding the characters of other races? Where did that come from? He is merely stating that they suffer because of identity crisis, on both sides. He's not saying that "those poor white kids are going to think they are black", he is saying all kids of mixed race suffer indentity crises. And that's arguable, but not racism.
People are way too quick to jump the gun and throw around all these nasty terms for people who have any supposedly politically incorrect opinion.
Let me ask you this: if this situation had been exactly the same, except for one point, that the JP was black instead of white, would you all be calling him racist? I bet not. You can't have it both ways.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
My apologies then. Yes, I did read your entire post. I thought you were being dismissive with your opening comment, which you say you were not, and for that I am sorry that I misjudged what you meant.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
But sued? I find that a bit overkill. What is the obsession with sueing people these days? It's gotten ridiculous. "hey, you pissed me off, you owe me money!". I never understood the correlation between someone being "wronged" and giving them money for compensation, when finances never came into the equation in the first place.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
yes i would.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say