Interracial couple denied marriage license in La.

[SirJosephPorter]

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. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

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.

Interracial couple denied marriage license in La. - Yahoo! News

I thought this sort of thing disappeared with George Wallace and Jim Crow. Evidently it is still the in thing, the respectable thing to do in some parts of the Bible Belt.

 

[TenPenny]

Interesting. I wonder what leeway issuers of marriage licenses have to deny the license.

 

[Spade]

Licence refused for being seen in Louisiana as licentious?

 

[TenPenny]

Licence refused for being seen in Louisiana as licentious?

Look, lady, Louisiana limits licentious living.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

It would be illegal here in Canada, and I am pretty sure it is illegal in USA as well. I don’t think it is at the discretion of Justice of the Peace as to whom he can grant a marriage license.

There are certain criteria that a couple has to fulfill so they can get married, and race of the couple isn’t one of them. I am pretty sure he was breaking the law. Anyway, a lawsuit has been filed against him; we will see how it turns out.

Interestingly, we had the same argument here not long ago, about gay marriages. The verdict was that Justice of the Peace or magistrate or whoever, cannot refuse to marry gays, if they did that, they could well be fired from the job.

 

[TenPenny]

Interestingly, we had the same argument here not long ago, about gay marriages. The verdict was that Justice of the Peace or magistrate or whoever, cannot refuse to marry gays, if they did that, they could well be fired from the job.

But I believe that a minister/priest does have the right to refuse to marry a gay couple, on religious grounds.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

But I believe that a minister/priest does have the right to refuse to marry a gay couple, on religious grounds.

A priest or a minister has the absolute right to marry anybody he chooses. He has the right to refuse to marry interracial couples. Even if a couple is not legally entitled to marry, the priest still may marry them. Thus United Church used to perform gay weddings long before they became legal. Such weddings wouldn’t have any legal significance, of course. But the point is, a priest or a minister is a private citizen and may do as he wishes.

A Justice of Peace on the other hand, is representative of the government and as such is bound by the laws. If the law says that interracial marriage (or gay marriage) is legal, then a representative of the government may not refuse to marry such couples. However, a private citizen (minister or a priest) may marry whomever he chooses.

 

[EagleSmack]

But I believe that a minister/priest does have the right to refuse to marry a gay couple, on religious grounds.

In the end...these two will get married. This guy just didn't want to marry them.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

In the end...these two will get married. This guy just didn't want to marry them.

They have already got married, EagleSmack. But that is not the issue. The issue is, should a representative of government be allowed to discriminate based upon race?

 

[Colpy]

It would be illegal here in Canada, and I am pretty sure it is illegal in USA as well. I don’t think it is at the discretion of Justice of the Peace as to whom he can grant a marriage license.

There are certain criteria that a couple has to fulfill so they can get married, and race of the couple isn’t one of them. I am pretty sure he was breaking the law. Anyway, a lawsuit has been filed against him; we will see how it turns out.

Interestingly, we had the same argument here not long ago, about gay marriages. The verdict was that Justice of the Peace or magistrate or whoever, cannot refuse to marry gays, if they did that, they could well be fired from the job.

In fact, the Justice could (and should) be charged under Federal US law for denying the couple their civil rights.

 

[Colpy]

They have already got married, EagleSmack. But that is not the issue. The issue is, should a representative of government be allowed to discriminate based upon race?

No he should not be allowed to deny them a license.....however, if he found it morally repugnant to perform the ceremony itself (for any reason), he should be allowed to send them down the street.......

There is the line, IMHO.

 

[EagleSmack]

They have already got married, EagleSmack. But that is not the issue. The issue is, should a representative of government be allowed to discriminate based upon race?

He's a JP. He has married black couples before...he just does not like to marry mixed races.

He will most likely lose his JP status if what he did was against the law.

But why would you post this? You are the biggest racist in here. There is no difference than you and him.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

But why would you post this? You are the biggest racist in here. There is no difference than you and him.

We have been through this before, EagleSmack, if a conservative says that I am a racist, then my views about race are just right, considering the fact that blacks shun conservatives like they shun the black plague, most blacks find conservatism as repugnant as they would find Nazism.

So if a conservative says I am a racist, that means that my views on race are just right. If a conservative were to say that I am not a racist, then I would be worried.

 

[EagleSmack]

We have been through this before, EagleSmack, if a conservative says that I am a racist, then my views about race are just right,

In your opinion.

considering the fact that blacks shun conservatives like they shun the black plague, most blacks find conservatism as repugnant as they would find Nazism.

Stereotyping African Amercans... racist

Calling African Americans "black"... racist

So if a conservative says I am a racist, that means that my views on race are just right. If a conservative were to say that I am not a racist, then I would be worried.

Many in here were offended by you saying women of color around the world should look up to Michelle Obama because you said "she is as dark as they come" declared your statement was ignorant and racist. Which is what it was...bigot.

You see, if you had said Michelle Obama should be looked up to by ALL woman around the world because of her accomplishments you wouldn't be so chastised.

But instead you said women of color in third world nations should look up to Michelle because she "is as dark as they come". You judged her by the color of her skin. Totally racist and very ignorant.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

In your opinion.



Stereotyping African Amercans... racist

Calling African Americans "black"... racist

Again, just your opinion, EagleSmack. And coming from a conservative (whose philosophy blacks despise as they would despise Nazism), I wear it as a badge of honour.

Many in here were offended by you saying women of color around the world should look up to Michelle Obama because you said "she is as dark as they come" declared your statement was ignorant and racist. Which is what it was...bigot.
.

Not many, it was you who shed the crocodile tears over it. It was a perfectly reasonable comment. Indeed, the fact that you consider it racist shows to me that it was a reasonable comment.

You see, if you had said Michelle Obama should be looked up to by ALL woman around the world because of her accomplishments you wouldn't be so chastised.

.

But that is not what I meant to say. The article quoted specifically said that many third world women look up to Michelle Obama, precisely because she looks like them, she is dark skinned like them. And I don’t see anything wrong with that. Indeed, the fact that you think it is wrong tells me that there is nothing wrong with that. Because your philosophy, your ideas of racism are rejected by more than 90% of blacks.

But instead you said women of color in third world nations should look up to Michelle because she "is as dark as they come". You judged her by the color of her skin. Totally racist and very ignorant.

Totally reasonable and proper. That is what the article quoted by me said, and I agreed with it. If she had been white, I seriously doubt that third world women would have looked up to her. They did not look up to Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton etc. They look up to Michelle Obama precisely because she looks like them.

The fact that you think that is racist, tells me that it is not racist. Also that really demonstrates why blacks reject your idea of racism by more than 90%.

Anyway, I don’t want to turn this thread into the other thread about Michelle Obama, so I won’t answer any further posts from you about that thread. If you want to continue this discussion, post it in the appropriate thread.

But I stand by everything I said in that thread.

 

[EagleSmack]

Again, just your opinion, EagleSmack. And coming from a conservative (whose philosophy blacks despise as they would despise Nazism),

More sterotyping...more racism.

Saying all "blacks" despise conservatives is not only false but stereotypical racism.

I wear it as a badge of honour.

Just like the aryan nation. You're no different.

Not many, it was you who shed the crocodile tears over it. It was a perfectly reasonable comment. Indeed, the fact that you consider it racist shows to me that it was a reasonable comment.

Sure they did. Go read them...I bumped it.

But that is not what I meant to say.

Sure it was and you DID say it.

The article quoted specifically said that many third world women look up to Michelle Obama, precisely because she looks like them, she is dark skinned like them. And I don’t see anything wrong with that. Indeed, the fact that you think it is wrong tells me that there is nothing wrong with that.

The article itself was looked at as ignorant (particularly among women in India)... your take is racist.

Because your philosophy, your ideas of racism are rejected by more than 90% of blacks.

A double dose of racism.

I bet you wouldn't shout out what you wrote to a gathering of African Americans.

Totally reasonable and proper. That is what the article quoted by me said, and I agreed with it. If she had been white, I seriously doubt that third world women would have looked up to her. They did not look up to Laura Bush, Hillary Clinton etc.

Of course you think that. That is why you are a racist and an elitest.

They look up to Michelle Obama precisely because she looks like them.

Them! THEM!

LMAO.

You're such a bigot.

The fact that you think that is racist, tells me that it is not racist. Also that relay demonstrates why blacks reject your idea of racism by more than 90%.

Oooo.. I doubt that.

Anyway, I don’t want to turn this thread into the other thread about Michelle Obama, so I won’t answer any further posts from you about that thread. If you want to continue this discussion, post it in the appropriate thread.

But I stand by everything I said in that thread.

I am sure you do stand by your racist views.

 

[Cannuck]

The issue is, should a representative of government be allowed to discriminate based upon race?

No, the issue is your trolling. That is why you ended your OP with, "Evidently it is still the in thing, the respectable thing to do in some parts of the Bible Belt." and it is why your post was reported.

 

[Colpy]

No, the issue is your trolling. That is why you ended your OP with, "Evidently it is still the in thing, the respectable thing to do in some parts of the Bible Belt." and it is why your post was reported.

Yeah, I caught that.....but I don't report anything.

Unlike the idiot in question, I know being offended is just something you have to put up with if you want a free exchange of ideas, or just simple freedom of speech, for that matter.

 

[Cannuck]

Yeah, I caught that.....but I don't report anything.

Unlike the idiot in question, I know being offended is just something you have to put up with if you want a free exchange of ideas, or just simple freedom of speech, for that matter.

I'm not the least bit offended by Pompass. I think he's hilarious. The mods have said that trolling has gotten out of hand and want it to end. I'm just helping them out by pointing it out.

 

[EagleSmack]

Well this is his MO. This is what gets him off. He's a troll. He starts threads to get reactions from people. We answer them because we get a kick out of making him look like the silly little house husband that he is.