Interracial Couple Denied Marriage License

[silverbear]

But... but... he let them use his bathroom

Maybe he meant "clean", instead of "use"...

 

[Achozen]

So this nutcase won't marry black and white couples. What an idiot. How about white and Asian, like me and my wife?

Is your wife Asian?

 

[Kevinicus]

You don't think this is racial discrimination? I'd think the fact that he's asking them whether they are a mixed race couple, and refusing to marry them if they are, pretty much seals the deal as far as that's concerned. His decision is based on race, therefore I'd consider it racism.

Discrimination, even if based soley on race, doesn't mean it's racism (doesn't mean it's not either). People have a such confused concept of the term racism anymore.

RACIAL would be the accurate word to describe this, not RACISM.

 

[ShiningStar]

Discrimination, even if based soley on race, doesn't mean it's racism (doesn't mean it's not either). People have a such confused concept of the term racism anymore.

RACIAL would be the accurate word to describe this, not RACISM.

its racisim because 1, you are correct people dont understand the term and 2 it screams louder so it must be right *see my views of "if i scream louder than you I must be right" debates and 3. everyone wants to stamp out hate on one side, but if its worded nicely, than its not racism.


Agree with your post and feel people are jumping on the wagon to quick to feel they have the right to tell everyone else how to think and feel and view things and which views are acceptable. You know, against all the ones they wanted stamped out and now tell those people how to think and view.

 

[theogt]

rac·ism (rā'sĭz'əm)
n.

Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Yup, this is racism.

 

[burmafrd]

IF someone has the firm belief that inter racial marriages will not last and cause more harm then good then that is his or her right to believe that way. BUT as an elected official you take an OATH to uphold the LAW. If you cannot uphold the law then you should resign.

 

[theogt]

IF someone has the firm belief that inter racial marriages will not last and cause more harm then good then that is his or her right to believe that way.

So, you're saying people have a right to be racist? I guess that's true in a strictly legal sense. But from a moral or societal sense, no, they don't.

 

[Danny White]

IF someone has the firm belief that inter racial marriages will not last and cause more harm then good then that is his or her right to believe that way. BUT as an elected official you take an OATH to uphold the LAW. If you cannot uphold the law then you should resign.

So, you're saying people have a right to be racist? I guess that's true in a strictly legal sense. But from a moral or societal sense, no, they don't.

There's a huge difference between someone personally holding this view and a public, elected official not just holding this view but acting upon it in his official capacity.

Any conservative or libertarian should be outraged by this. There is no defense for him using his public office to enforce his personal biases... especially when it is in direct violation of the law.

 

[Cover 2]

You know what? He's absolutely right. Interracial children are always doomed to a life of pain and sorrow.

Look at Halle Berry.

 

[theogt]

You know what? He's absolutely right. Interracial children are always doomed to a life of pain and sorrow.

Look at Halle Berry.

Or, you know, the President of the United States.

 

[Cover 2]

Or, you know, the President of the United States.

LOL that too. Shows where my head was.

 

[burmafrd]

OGT- once upon a time those who spoke out against racism were treated the same way. They had a right then to speak what they believed. Just as those who disagree with things as they are now have a right to believe that way. Its called freedom of thought and belief. Maybe you need to do a little research on that right-one that is maybe not in the Consituition but has been upheld anyway.
Think THOUGHT POLICE and that is the road YOU are going down.

 

[Cover 2]

OGT- once upon a time those who spoke out against racism were treated the same way. They had a right then to speak what they believed. Just as those who disagree with things as they are now have a right to believe that way. Its called freedom of thought and belief. Maybe you need to do a little research on that right-one that is maybe not in the Consituition but has been upheld anyway.
Think THOUGHT POLICE and that is the road YOU are going down.

He does have the right to think what he wants; however, everyone else has the right to voice their thoughts of his opinions.

 

[ShiningStar]

OGT- once upon a time those who spoke out against racism were treated the same way. They had a right then to speak what they believed. Just as those who disagree with things as they are now have a right to believe that way. Its called freedom of thought and belief. Maybe you need to do a little research on that right-one that is maybe not in the Consituition but has been upheld anyway.
Think THOUGHT POLICE and that is the road YOU are going down.

Burm, people are thrilled that we have to like people because its the law, not because we want to. Thought police dont scare people, they want that. They want people to tell them how to think, how to speak, how to act and WHO to like, who to hire and who you have to socialize with.

 

[Cover 2]

Burm, people are thrilled that we have to like people because its the law, not because we want to. Thought police dont scare people, they want that. They want people to tell them how to think, how to speak, how to act and WHO to like, who to hire and who you have to socialize with.

I really don't care what he thinks. The only reason it's even an issue is because he is BREAKING THE LAW in order to further his own cause. It's wrong when anybody does it (I'm trying hard to keep this from turning political). If he was just an ordinary person very few people would care, but since he's not allowing people to get married because of preconceived notions he has, then that is a problem. It has nothing to do with thought police. It has to do with him not liking something, so he feels that's the way it should be. It's an abuse of power, that's why people are up in arms.

 

[Kevinicus]

rac·ism (rā'sĭz'əm)
n.

Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Yup, this is racism.

IMO, that is a very broad, weak, and inaccurate definition of racism (Though I am aware some dictionaries use it - thus me mentioning that the term has much confusion surrounding it).

 

[ShiningStar]

I really don't care what he thinks. The only reason it's even an issue is because he is BREAKING THE LAW in order to further his own cause. It's wrong when anybody does it (I'm trying hard to keep this from turning political). If he was just an ordinary person very few people would care, but since he's not allowing people to get married because of preconceived notions he has, then that is a problem. It has nothing to do with thought police. It has to do with him not liking something, so he feels that's the way it should be. It's an abuse of power, that's why people are up in arms.

Than do the right thing come election time. Thats all. Care to take on all politicians that abuse their power? Or just jumping on the easy ones?

 

[hairic]

Fun facts: The marriage license itself is a racist's tool. It was created and used after slaves were freed as a mechanism to retain racial purity among whites until the SCOTUS pooped on it 40 years ago.

 

[Cover 2]

Fun facts: The marriage license itself is a racist's tool. It was created and used after slaves were freed as a mechanism to retain racial purity among whites until the SCOTUS pooped on it 40 years ago.

Interesting. I didn't know that.

 

[TheCount]

IMO, that is a very broad, weak, and inaccurate definition of racism (Though I am aware some dictionaries use it - thus me mentioning that the term has much confusion surrounding it).

Well that's the kicker isn't it. Who gets to define what racism is? You? Me? A dictionary?

If racism is defined as prejudice based on race, I'd say this is a clear case of racism. If you're trying to argue that his racist views aren't based on hate, but on his own twisted form of logic, then I could see that. But to say the guy isn't racist, I don't buy it.