|
tazzygirl -> RE: Michelle Bachmann Condemns Interracial Marriage (12/1/2011 10:32:18 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BanthaSamantha
quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA
And here I thought you were worth the time to communicate with. You're not.
The "ignorance" is yours. One issue is ILLEGAL... the other is not. You'd know that, but for you lack of common sense.
[8|]
I tried hinting at it, but I'll go ahead and spell it out.
The issue here isn't the fact that Bachmann feels same-sex marriage is illegal. That much isn't in dispute. I'll go ahead and concede to you that it is illegal.
Instead, the issue here is that Bachmann feels that same-sex marriage should be illegal.
I got your point. And the fact that you stated in the third post that you had changed some words. The allegation of lying is just false. It simply proves others did not read beyond the first post.
As I was reading it, my first reaction was
"What the hell is this? No way she would be this stupid" Which is why I originally asked you where it came from. Then I googled on my own. And I realized I had read it before.
And, yes, your rendition was an apt application of the same meaning, same design, same intention as the other.
Not too long ago, interracial marriages were illegal. Called Anti-miscegenation laws, many were not repealed until the Supreme Court ruling in Loving vs Virgnia
In 1967, 84 years after Pace v. Alabama in 1883, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Loving v. Virginia that:
"Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not to marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."
Very few states had no such laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_miscegenation.svg
What others may find a bit interesting...
In 1967, 17 Southern states (all the former slave states plus Oklahoma) still enforced laws prohibiting marriage between whites and people of color. Maryland repealed its law in response to the start of the proceedings at the Supreme Court. After the ruling of the Supreme Court, the remaining laws were no longer in effect. Nonetheless, it took South Carolina until 1998 and Alabama until 2000 to officially amend their states' constitutions to remove language prohibiting miscegenation. In the respective referendums, 62% of voters in South Carolina and 59% of voters in Alabama voted to remove these laws.
To me, your point was that just because something isnt legal doesnt make it ok to not be legal. It wasnt legal for a white person to marry a black person... or a hispanic to marry white... or
As one Judge said in the Loving case...
In 1965, Virginia trial court Judge Leon Bazile, who heard their original case, refused to reconsider his decision. Instead, he defended racial segregation, writing:
"Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."[25]
Arent we still hearing that echo today?
|
|
|
|
