It's the year 2009. Barack Obama, a bi-racial man, has been elected President of the United States of America. As we look back through our history, we can see the events that led up to him becoming president.
School segregation was outlawed in 1954. Some cities (like Dallas) didn't institute it until 1970. Even now schools suffer from de facto segregation, but at least the de jure segregation is over, I suppose.
In 1967, the Supreme Court determined that interracial marriages were legal. This was another landmark decision. No longer were people told who they could and couldn't love.
Despite this fact, 40+ years later a Justice of the Peace in Louisiana thinks that he doesn't have to abide by that Supreme Court decision. Keith Bardwell refused to marry at least four interracial couples in the last 2 1/2 years.
After much publicity and despite his term being up in 2014, Mr. Bardwell has now decided to resign. Thank goodness.














Comments (2)
What actually happened was not that he refused to allow them to marry. He made a decision based on his personal experience with interracial couples and interracial children. He himself said that he does not enjoy turning them down, and he in fact refers them to other justices who will marry them. His reasoning behind it was that in his experience, interracial couples and interracial children are outcast from society, and no one accepts them. This is true for the entire country, but think about Louisiana and the rest of the South, which are still heavily white supremacist whether you care to admit it or not. He has friends who are black, and even they admitted that the black community, just like the white community, outcast interracial couples and their children. Based on this, he decided he did not want to be the person to put these families in this situation, so he politely turned them down and referred them to the closest justices who would marry them. He didn't believe that what he was doing was right, but he did not want it on his conscience that these people and their families would be outcast by members of their society for being in love.
When you look at the facts that the news presented, and his interviews, and not just say "he refused to marry them", it makes a lot more sense. He was just looking out for people, but the way you posted it here makes him look like a KKK member who refused to marry them because one person in the couple was black. I can understand if it upsets you, but you shouldn't repost it here in a way that makes him look as if he were some white supremacist. I'm not trying to say what he did was right, but he didn't outright refuse them marriage; he did in fact refer them to people that would marry them. He just didn't want to be the one person that put the couple and their child into that position of being outcast by everyone, which we all know would have happened because, as much as we all hate to admit it, that kind of racism is still out there, especially in the south. What you posted reinforces that, and makes him look like one of those people, when in fact he simply didn't want to be the one to throw the steak into the lion's den.
Posted by Scott Delaney
|
November 20, 2009 10:30 AM
Posted on November 20, 2009 10:30
well in my thoughts any person that refuses
to marry pure love is judging a person heart.
it's the same as saying how do you know if
two people are right for each other and there
marriage will make it.if so all the governors
and high office people should have never been
allowed to married seeing that their children
lives would be ruined because of sexuall sin.
some one should have never married them.How many movie stars and their children have become
an outcast to soceity and they are all white
some one should have never married them seeing
the damage to the children.only good and evil
should not be married meaning if a person has a
good heart and loving heart they should not
marry some one who is evil and hateful and
unforgiven.
Posted by clyde jr
|
April 29, 2010 1:15 PM
Posted on April 29, 2010 13:15