Desiree Cooper wrote a couple of years ago for the Detroit Free Press (I can no longer find a copy online) about her own family's experiences with the bans on interracial marriage:s
"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red and he placed them on separate continents," wrote a Virginia appeals court judge as late as 1965. "The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix." Not only was intermarriage considered anti-Christian, it was deemed morally repugnant. "Intermarriage between whites and blacks is repulsive and averse to every sentiment of pure American spirit," said Georgia's Sen. Seaborn Roddenberry in 1912. "Let us uproot and exterminate now this debasing, ultra-demoralizing, un-American and inhuman leprosy."
As a result, my great-grandparents not only never married, they never even lived under the same roof. They managed to raise eight children, but the family never had the legal rights afforded families of married couples. The children could not be given their father's name. Even when the children later married, they hid their father's identity on their marriage certificates.
When Logan died in 1936, Mary and their children stood outside the church, forbidden to attend the funeral. Because he left no will, the sheriff rounded up Logan's possessions and divided them among 22 of even his most distant relatives, purposely excluding his "colored" family. When Mary died three years later, she wasn't buried beside the man she'd loved for 45 years, but in a separate graveyard for blacks.
This is a truly horrible, depressing story about an unjust system -- and what's even worse is that something very similar happens today to gay couples. This, however, is what religious conservatives want for society. It's what they wanted for society back when they were able to get away with racial bigotry and it's what they want now today when they can still get away with homophobic bigotry.
The targets of hatred and discrimination change based on whatever groups are most vulnerable and can thus be exploited most readily, but the basic attitude remains despite the changing of generations. You'd think that younger conservatives would finally learn from the mistakes of their predecessors. Then again, maybe they have but the lesson they learned is to extract as much value from discriminating against vulnerable minorities for as long as possible because the gravy train won't last forever.
That Judge’s comment about what the, totally imagined, so-called wonderful, loving, deity created as an obvious(?) set-up for conflict…much like the phony Garden of Eden/talking snake BS…IMO, proves how ridiculous the whole argument for “Intelligent Design” is. Like many other atheists, I call it something like “Insidious…Inconsiderate…Innocuous…Inconceivable…In-your-face(?)…design. Total BS, of course; but another blatant example of what totally made-up mythologies have done to this World for WAY too long.
And that came from a “judge”? Outrageous!
Pardon me, folks, for a bit of tangential, “Easter” weekend, ranting…
OT, of course; but it reminds me of the totally silly (and obnoxious) Garden of Eden scene…two totally naked humans being lectured by a bodiless voice about not eating from a strange, solitary tree…the one with the talking ’snake’ (penis?), of course.
“Ummm…Lord?…what’s IT…an, erm, snake, you say?…doing hanging about in this garden? Are you trying to trick us? You…who NEVER was, ummm, tested?…or, for that matter, forced to do ANYTHING…EVER?…(yada, yada).
I’ve been reminded this past week, especially, of what all the perennial Judeo-Christian hoopla is really related to…you know…the Passover/Sater shtick; and, for that matter, the “Lord’s Last Supper”?
[cue De Vinci?]
Y’all know the supposed story, I assume; regarding “God’s CHOSEN people”
(What!…spectacular, Almighty Favoritism?…as per usual?) fighting with the, non-chosen, Pharaoh for release from slavery; the last supposed plague, of course, being an outrageous example of horrendous “Infanticide”.
“Nice going, God! More right to Life…Free will, huh?”
Like all those, unnoticed by “Right to Lifers”…God’s miscarriages, birth defects, childhood diseases, etc.
Religion, in all of its bizarre manifestations, absolutely boggles the mind with its obvious setup for screwing up the total history of our species. Today (3/3/10), being so-called “Holy Saturday”, with all that’s happening RE various intense Political conflicts…the RCC’s child rape/abuse case, etcetera, etcetera…somehow stands out as even more of a demonstration of just how much of a ‘fog’ people spend their lives in.
As I see it, the only hope for evolutionary humanity is the gradual “waking up”, one by one, of individual humans to the outrageous religious stupidity that has ‘plagued’ and polluted mankind for, literally, thousands, if not hundreds of thousands (millions?) of years.
In the meantime, it’s up to all of us atheists, whenever possible in our relatively short time on this very strange Planet, to speak up for evidence-based truth and rationality.
More to the point of this Post, I guess; bottom-line?…IMHO, a person should be able to marry…or to live together, UN-married…whomever they choose…of ANY race and/or gender. It’s none of anyone else’s…certainly NOT the government’s…business to interfere with that “free choice”.
To the religious, in particular: “Keep your big (or whatever) noses out of other people’s lives! AND, for a change, perhaps…
just sit down, and STFU!”
Oh, and Happy…erm…
“Keester”?
Ummm…correction…my referred to, comment date should have been:
(4/3/10)
“D’oh!”
After reading this gets me thinking about how conservatives want to “get things back to the way they used to be” in this country. When saying that, I wonder if they really have considered the way things used to be. This country has come a long way, but still has a ways to go. We can’t deny our dark history or make pretend that it never happened. What do Christians mean when they say they need to take back this country for Christ? The way things used to be is segregation, slavery, no rights for women, no rights for blacks. This is part of our country’s history. This is what God “intended” for our “great nation” when He created it. This is the “Christian Nation.” Is this what they want to return to? I know of no other history.
Being a black man who is also gay and atheist, I felt somewhat embarrassed that when gay marriage was being considered in DC there were a number of black pastors and ministers who were saying they needed to band together to stop it from happening. I think black people should be the last ones(actually never do it in the first place) to want to deny someone else civil rights. Do they remember how long and hard we worked for it!
When someone says “race” what they really mean is species, and the claim of “racists” is that people of different skin from themselves are not even human, let alone intelligent and deserving of rights. As one who accepts the fact of human migration out of Africa, I cannot use any other word than human to describe people of different skin than myself.
The mental definition – and deficiency – among bigots that different ethnicities are “not human” is the exact same mentality that rationalizes hate against homosexuals, the idea that gay people are also “not human”. And the bigots “ability” to see other ethnicities as “not human” is also why they try to equate homosexuality with bestiality.
Why does it not surprise, then, to learn that one of the extreme rightwingers in the US (racist, sexist, anti-abortion and gay-hating) admitted to having sex with animals?
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/05/06/bizarre_sex_habits_of_the_extreme_rightwing.php
Back then, apparently, conservatives were Democrats. Were the Republican progressives?
Well, here’s the thing:
With regards to interracial marriage:
Since you are an atheist you must admit that evolution is real and that it did not magically stop working 70,000 years ago when the last common ancestor of man lived, correct?
Therefor you must admit that the differences in the races are also real and biological in nature, correct?
The top 10% of humanity creates 90% of it’s wealth and jobs. The reason why Brazil has a GDP/capita that’s less than 1/5 of ours is because of interracial marriage and the fact that less successful people have more children.
(It wouldn’t be a problem if the most successful had the most children, since it would be the good genes that built up)
With regards to gay marriage: Gay people do not have children while normal people do. Then, when we grow older, these children are forced to pay social security for all, even though the gays did not invest in them. Is this fair? Why should gay marriage and straight marriage be treated equally by the state, when straight marriages give more to society?
ChuckA said: “To the religious, in particular: “Keep your big (or whatever) noses out of other people’s lives! AND, for a change, perhaps…”
Why should the religious keep their nose out of other people’s lives? What you do in you bedroom has an effect on me. It costs society billions in the form of STD’s, out of wedlock pregnancy, etc. Furthermore, environmentalists/humanitarians/socialists etc do not hesitate to ban things they don’t like, so unless you’re a libertarian you are discriminating against Christians.
Actually, that’s something admitted by any reasonably informed, intelligent, and honest person.
As much as the differences between any two individuals are biological, yes.
Feel free to support this claim.
Prove it.
This presumes that gays are not “normal”. Feel free to support this.
What’s more, it’s a demonstrable fact that many gay couples do have children, whether adopted or biological.
It’s no less fair than people paying the social security for those who never had children. I notice you don’t complain about this, which means that this complaint about gays isn’t sincere.
Feel free to prove that gay couples contribute less to society.
Uh, because it’s not your lives?
Prove it.
On the same level, what you eat has an effect on me.
Feel free to demonstrate that such groups ban things based solely on the criteria “we don’t like it.”
“Feel free to demonstrate that such groups ban things based solely on the criteria “we don’t like it.””
Feel free to demonstrate the Christians are fighting gay marriage because of “homophobic bigotry”. Feel free to demonstrate that they fought interracial marriage because of “racial bigotry”.
My point is that:
1) the laws, while perhaps morally wrong, are not written because of “bigotry” like you claim, but are instead trying to address real concerns. Christians are not trying to ban gay marriage just for the fun of discriminating, like you seem to claim.
2) It is unfair to argue that environmentalists can ban whaling because whales are “sacred” then argue that Christians can not do the same for pork. The government belongs to everyone equally. Indeed, the fact that Christians generally do not care what you eat makes them more tolerant on this issue. IF gays force Christians to pay for AIDS medicine, then why shouldn’t Christians be allowed to try and stop them from getting it in the first place? I do not see gays as a minority group any more than smokers are a minority group. The case against gay marriage would be much weaker if we didn’t have so many social programs.
I have. You can do a search here on the site.
I have. You can do a search here on the site.
You haven’t listed any. I challenge you to provide a single reason to oppose interracial marriage that doesn’t ultimately rely on racial bigotry.
I haven’t said that anyone can ban whiling because whales are sacred. If the only way you can argue your point is to attribute to me things I’ve never claimed then you might as well admit right from the beginning that you have no defensible position.
Since AIDS isn’t a gay-only disease and Christians have had AIDS, your question makes no sense. One might as well ask: If smokers force Buddhists to pay for lung cancer treatments, why can’t Buddhists try to prevent them from getting it in the first place?
Whether you see it or not isn’t relevant unless you have a sound argument to defend the claim — and you don’t.
Feel free to show how.