Beth Humphrey, 30, and her boyfriend, Terence McKay, 32
posted by Sam Richards
Some of you have no doubt heard this story pass through the media outlets. More surprising than the Justice of the Peace being unwilling to give these two a marriage license is that fact that he stands by his decision, as discussed in THIS ARTICLE.
Before you go off on how outrageous this is, I want to remind you that two weeks ago in class I discuss the number of you who would not adopt a child with ancestry other than your own or who would not use the sperm or egg of people with ancestry different from your own. And you might recall that everyone who stated that they were uncomfortable being the head of a mixed ancestry family all said it was because of the children. “The children would have a difficult go of it down the road,” was the sentiment.
So how is this judge any different? Along with “mixed race marriages often end in divorce,” this is what this guy has said (although that particular statment is not in this article). Sounds like we might have to get back to some serious thinking about what constitutes racism and bigotry. If people in SOC 119 can say it, why not the judge? Okay, so you’re actions of not starting mixed ancestry families do not impact someone else’s life, but the idea that we’re protecting those who most need “protection” is still the same. Just a thought worth pondering.
It’s unfortunate that he speaks with a southern accent. In fairness, he says that his definition of “racist” is when you treat black people differently than white people. By not issuing the marriage license he’s actually treating black and white people the same! So I guess he’s not racist. Life is complex…
After reading the blog post and watching the video, I didn’t think that Keith Bardwell was racist so much as irrational and stepping outside the boundaries of his job. He has married African American couples without a problem in the past, so I do not think he is racist. I think that he was worried about the racism that their potential children might face, but he had no right to use this as grounds to deny Humphrey and McKay. It is not his decision, but the couples, if they are ready/capable of the commitment. And in Humphrey and McKay’s case, ready to face the undeserved stipulations that come with an interracial marriage, then they should be allowed to marry. ‘Just looking out for someone’ is not a valid reason to deny someone marriage, and Humphrey and McKay were already willing to accept the problems that they and their children may face. Bardwell’s decision to deny the couple marriage only posed as an obstacle that the couple had to overcome. It was unnecessary to deny them marriage, when they could easily go get married somewhere else, which they did. Instead, he could have offered them his two cents on interracial marriage and then married them. This would have caused a lot less controversy while still allowing Mr. Bardwell to give his warning to the couple. An interracial marriage is not a common thing, and a dilemma like this is probably a deterrent for people to people to have interracial relationships.
There is both right and wrong in this situation, so it is hard to remedy. Bardwell was right to be concerned about the discrimination that multiracial children receive, about the couple’s future, but he was wrong to use this to deny them marriage. They at least deserved a chance. Bardwell overstepped his boundaries when it came to this marriage. He was not doing his job, and I believe that he should at least apologize to the couple for failing to do his job for them. He can think that what he did was right, but it did not lay within his job description. He may have been trying to help the couple, but it has only caused unrest and anger and failed to stop the couple for obtaining their marriage license. This has only caused the couple more grief than they should experience for such a happy event as marriage. If Bardwell is not a racist, which I do not believe him to be, then there is a right and a wrong in what he did. He showed his concern (maybe a little too much) and denied them marriage. He was both right and wrong but people will see it the way they want.
[Reply]
I think there is a pretty big difference between someone saying that they wouldn’t want to adopt or be inseminated a child of another race and a judge not allowing bi-racial marriages. If I say that I don’t want to adopt a child of another race (which I wouldn’t because I would actually prefer a child of another race) that decision is only effecting me and my family and has nothing to do with put other people down but a judge who is in office and refuses to marry a bi-racial couple “because in his experience they end up in divorce” is oppressing and greatly effecting another persons well being. A judge has a position where it is his job to be bi-partisan and represent the law. Nowhere is there a law that says that these two people cannot get married and he cannot bring his own beliefs into the courtroom. There is no place for racism in the courts.
I also have a problem with people who say they won’t do this because the kids will be in a difficult position and I won’t marry them because thy will end in divorce. Every case is different and everyone should be given the same chances at the life that they want especially if they know it is going to be hard and do it anyway. There is no way that Beth and Terence think that their marriage is going to be easy and simple. But they are willing to step up and do this because they believe in themselves and their relationship. How can the judge possibly know that they won’t survive? That is like the judge saying that in his experience he has seen that kids who steal always steal again so I am going to throw them in jail, It isn’t right.
After class yesterday, I have to think about how people will jump at this case saying that it is an injustice and that it is not the judge’s place to have a say in whether they an get married or not and it was even discussed that he could lose his job. Why can’t the same consideration be given to same sex marriages? It is the same thing to deny a man and a woman of different races as it is to deny two men the right of marriage. Marriage should not be treated as a privilege because it is the right of everyone in America to marry whomever they choose without the law stepping in. I can’t believe that society is still punishing people for being different than them. What Sam said the other day really stuck with me. He said that it would actually benefit the world if 40% of the population was gay. That is a really interesting way to look at it and I agree.
[Reply]
This particular article has several different ways that one could feel about it. First, the easy reaction is to say that he is a racist, he should be fired, and he is upholding individual rights under the law. Another reaction could be that if really feels that he cannot wed these two individuals in good conscious, and then he made the right decision to refer them to another justice. Lastly, one can agree with him that the children will struggle and maybe feel that these two individuals should not have children together, but also understand that it is their right under the law to marry whoever they wish. I feel as if this is the category that many students in our class tend to fall under. Sam brings up a good point with the adopting or conceiving a child of another race argument. I feel that if you are not willing to adopt or conceive a child from a different race, then you fall into the same category as the justice in this story. The only difference being between the justice in this story, and anyone that answered “no” in our class would be that this justice has the power to make these decisions and acts on his own feelings. With that said, I am by no means saying that a good amount of people in this class would have acted the same way as the justice did in this story. I believe the way that most people would feel in our class would be like, “well I don’t want a child of mixed race or a different race, but if these people want to do that then go right ahead.” So once again, the only difference here is that this justice was acting for these people, the same way he would for himself.
Coming back to the point about whether or not this act is racist, is a very interesting argument. This justice’s argument is that he allows all black couples to marry all white couples to marry, so he doesn’t treat them different, so his actions aren’t racist. I still tend to believe that these actions are racist, just the shear fact that he has problem with two people of different races getting married, regardless of the reason, I believe is a racist act. At the same time, in the public eye this guy comes off as a blatant racist, and his southern accent and hillbilly characteristics don’t help him. I have to give the guy credit for one thing, resiliency. It would have been a lot easier for this man to just allow this couple to get married or apologize for his actions, but instead he has opted to stick to his decision and be criticized by the media.
[Reply]
LOVE vs. JUSTICE
I have no idea what is going on in that mans had, quite frankly the whole story is a big WTF?! The thought of an interracial couple getting denied a marriage license is unthinkable. I mean you hear the stories of the dirty looks and/ or the harsh comments being said but to blatantly deny a couple their rights is ridiculous, what century are we living in? Then to make matters worse Keith Bardwell openly admits without remorse of his actions. The irony is he actually believes he is NOT a racist. He states, “ “I’m not a racist, I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house. My main concern is for the children.” So not only is he a blind racist but he actually thinks he is being helpful. Even watching him on the YouTube video one could see he did not see anything wrong with the situation and he couldn’t understand why everyone was so upset with him. His Reasoning behind it all was that he didn’t care what black people and white people did “JUST” as long as they did not produce an offspring. People like this disappoint me more than they make me angry because it is sad to know that some people really think like this and for people like Keith Bardwell their views will never change because they have been living their whole life believing this way and then teaching it to the next generation, at times it feels like it is a never ending cycle.
When Sam compared Keith Bardwell to the day in class when people (including myself) were hesitant of the idea to place an egg or sperm of another race to be their child, it is practically the same thing. The same concept applies when one makes an offensive racist joke, the people laughing at the joke are just as guilty as the people telling the joke (something we are guilty of doing at least once). One does not think about these things but Keith’s argument is that he is doing it to protect the couple in the long run, and the excuses in class for many were also to protect the child in the long run. Different circumstances, SAME idea. Therefore I agree, before we all blow our heads out the roof we must take a quick look at ourselves and try to fix the problem before trying to fix other people’s problem because although there are different levels of racism one is not more right than the other it is wrong all together, whether you’re white and racist against blacks, black and racist against white, or Hispanic/Latin and racist against Arabs, and so on and so forth.
[Reply]
When I first read this article I was shocked that justice of the peaces even had that type of power. From listening to this guy talk, he makes it seem that not giving marriage licenses to mixed couples is his own personal policy. I have many questions about the whole issue of denying marriage licenses to people. Does the justice of the peace have any leeway to use his or her own discretion on the couples? Are they allowed to have their own policies, such as no mixed couples? Is it really difficult to get a marriage license?
The man does not seem racist in the videos or when we see him speaking. Although the southern accent does not help to distance him from the southern racist stereotype, he seems like a fairly professional person. I feel that if there is a set of guidelines (laws) that the justices of peace have to follow, and he choose to break those rules in order to aid his own personal agenda, then he should be fired. It is almost like him being a vigilante in a public office. I did not understand the whole thing about him being concerned about their future children. Why in the world is it the concern of this old guy to deny two people the right to get married because he feels that their children that they have not even had yet are going to be negatively impacted by their impending divorce? In this day and age wear any straight person can be legally married, who can he reject them because they fit into the category of interracial marriages, which are more likely to end in divorce according to statistics? I know he is died know, but for god sake Michael Jackson got married and then divorced. He is the weirdest thing on the planet and he was definitely not marrying for love. Britney Spears and all the other alcoholic stars can be married and unmarried in a matter of hours in Vegas. To deny these people the right to get married, is just pathetic. I know that they were soon after given a marriage license by another justice of the peace, but it is the principality of the matter.
It would be interesting to me to find out exactly what discretion that a justice of the peace has. If they are in fact allowed to use their better judgment in their decision to deny or approve couples for marriage licenses, then he is technically allowed to do it. If he broke the law by not giving them a marriage license then he should be fired. I don’t think the color of the people should matter in this case. If he broke the rules of the job he should be fired.
[Reply]
We are growing up in an ever diverse society. In one of my other classes my professor was speaking on the topic of our generation and the acceptance that we have for each other. When our parents’ were our age, discrimination and hatred was everywhere. It was normal to feel extreme dislike towards people who were “different” from you simply on the grounds that they were different. However, today, we have grown up in a multi racial world. From the time we were in elementary school we have interacted with other children our age who have a different skin color or a different religion or who speak with an accent. My professor told our class that our generation has vast opportunities no other age group has had before as we have not been raised to fight each other. To me, this is the difference between the two people speaking in the video. Obviously the Justice is an older man who may have been brought up based on the social inequalities that existed at the time. However, Terence is obviously living in the modern world, as hopefully we all will be one day.
The Justice has his personal beliefs as to what is right and wrong. However, as a Justice of the United States he should have been required to act on behalf of the law and not based on his own ideals. It is true many people in class did say that they would chose not to bring a multiracial baby in to the world because they did not want the child to face hardships. However, it’s hard for someone to say what they would do in such a personal situation if they have not been in it. I find it difficult to believe that if a white woman and a black man or a Chinese woman and a black man or a black woman and a man of any other race were in love they would not be able to look past conceiving a child that would be multi racial. When two people want to get married whether they are of different races or religions or cultures it is hard for me to find a reason to deny them of their happiness. Further, as Sam has mentioned in class several times, a large portion of Americans today are actually more than one race. Some may not know it but it is in their blood and DNA. So, even in the south, the United States is a more heterogeneous place and should continue on this path to become a more accepting place. If this generation, as my professor suggested, has become exponentially more tolerant of each other’s differences, I can only imagine what our children will be like.
So, for me, this is not so much a question of the struggle the baby will face. It is a situation in which one man put his outdated and ignorant personal beliefs before his duty as a representative of the United States of America. It is against the law to deny a man and a woman marriage and that cannot be changed by any one person or any state. Yes, the Justice treated the two people equally but he would not have reacted in an equal manner if the couple was made up of two whites or two blacks. That constitutes racism in my book.
[Reply]
I get what Sam is saying about how in class most people said that if using a surrogate or getting egg or sperm donors most of us said that we would not want a child of a race other than our own but I think that’s different. I think that the judge just threw the child issue in there so it would seem like he had a legit excuse. I mean come on; this is not about children at this point. Honestly I don’t think this justice should have any say on anything having to do with the couple’s future decision to have children. His only job is to give them a marriage license, I’m sure he’s given out tons of marriage licenses to same race couples that has ended in divorce also. Did he ever think when he was giving a license to a same race couple that they really didn’t seem to fit together and the marriage would most likely end in divorce which ultimately would make it difficult for any offspring they would have? I highly doubt that was the case- ever.
Clearly this guy is just full of shit, I mean I’m sure that after all of this happened and started to work its way into the news he just decided to come up with some excuse that seemed like a stretch but maybe some people would buy it. It’s highly doubtful that he has to take into consider the children that the couple may have when giving out marriage licenses.
I am also kind of shocked to find out that there was a law preventing different races from being married until 1967? I guess I would expect a law like that very early in our country’s history but 1967… really? That’s barely forty years ago. Sometimes I wonder about mixed race relationships. They exhaust but I feel like they are not super common, especially in the places I have lived. Maybe that has something to do with the emphasis on race that our country has, and I think that started way back when we took land from Native Americans and of course continued with slaves and segregation laws. In my opinion I believe that is black people were never put down in our society and people were never judges based on their skin we would see a lot more mixed relationships and marriages. Slavery and segregation was what set the precedent here in the US for the us and them. I don’t really know for sure if this is something that our country is getting over, but I hope so. I just feel as though so much of this is ingrained in our brains from a young age, even by learning US history we know that certain people used to think they were better than others and that still influences people today- which is sad.
[Reply]
This is an interesting story that I’m surprised still exists in these modern times. Although racism fully exists, and institutional racism exists, this just seems like a whole different ball game and is clearly racism in a legal setting.
This story is kind of hits home for me. I have a niece who is half black and half white (actually, her 3rd birthday was on Wednesday, 10/28) and quite a number of cousins who are of mixed ancestry as well (once again half black and half white). I could not imagine if a judge attempted to more-or-less deny them the privilege of life. While a female can become pregnant out of wedlock (as was the case for one of my nieces), the judge is exerting a strong amount of power toward conception, historically.
As for “protecting” this baby from a tough life, if more judges attempt to protect babies in this way it will never become easier growing up in the world with a mixed ancestry. I will mention that both black fathers were abusive, have left, and are either currently in jail or just totally out of the picture. However, in no way do I think that you can hold that against an entire race. It is an individual making individual decisions – hate the person, maybe, but do not dislike a race for it, or hold it against a race.
The difference between this judge’s decision to not allow an interracial marriage and your own decision to not have an interracial baby is that in his instance you are affecting lives that are totally disconnected from your own. This judge is making a personal decision of his own, then shoving it down the throats of others, forcing them to adopt his morals. If you choose not to have your own interracial baby, that’s a personal decision that is made on a personal level. You are not trying to force your own views of interracial marriages and people on anyone else.
A more comparable situation to this is if you worked at a sperm bank and would not allow a white woman to buy sperm that came from a black or brown man – that is affecting a life that is totally disconnected from your own and trying to force your own views onto other people. Or, if you worked for an adoption agency, not allowing a child of one race to go to an adopting family of a different race. For example, it is like not allowing a Korean kid to go to a white family (as is the case with quite a few of my friends). You really cannot try to compare choosing what race you want YOUR baby to be, compared to choosing the race that you think a stranger’s baby should be.
[Reply]
While being Asian and having the high possibility that I will marry a white woman, I would hate to be denied the opportunity to marry someone I loved. On the other hand though, I see where the judge is coming from. I can understand the sentiments on the feeling that the offspring of the couple will be disadvantaged. I come from a mixed family. My parents are both white, but I am adopted along with me two older sisters. We get strange looks all the time and my parents constantly have to clarify that I am their son. So I can see where the judge is coming from.
The only problem I have is if the couple wants to get married and is willing to deal with some of the problems that they might face then the judge should have given them the opportunity. It might be hard on the family, but mixing races to get married always provides difficulties. People should have the choice to make their own decisions and if they choose to deal with the problems that might arise then they should be allowed to go for it. It might have been beneficial for the judge to ask the couple how they plan on dealing with racism towards their offspring and then make his mind up from there.
It is just unfortunate that we have to deal with problems like this. If the world were a perfect place, which it is not, then we would all live together in peace. Human nature is to love and also is to hate. Everyone hates something or someone. Sometimes it is because of the way they were raised, but other times it is because of their personality. I think of it as the same with the battle nurture versus nature. Kids can be raised a certain way, but I think that the nature of the child also plays a big part in how he or she will grow up. I’m not saying that there aren’t times when parents do influence the child. What I’m saying is that both influence the child. Same thing goes with racist attitudes. People are sometimes grown up to hate a certain race, but sometimes a person might not like a certain race because of the way a person acts.
I am in no way justifying racism. I am merely saying that humans can hate for many reasons not just because of race. I am Asian, but I grew up in white culture and sometimes forget I am Asian. My parents don’t feel the need to emphasize that I am Asian and they are white. They don’t care who I am, I am their child and they love me. I dislike people not because of the color of their skin, but rather the personality that a person has. Color means nothing to me. I dislike people because I dislike them.
[Reply]
I really hate the “children” argument used against biracial relationships. Obviously, no one wants their children to suffer more than they would have to just because of their race. I’m not claiming that there is no validity in the argument, because it has been proven that children of mixed race face hardships in terms of socialization and personal identity. However, it is the biracial couple’s prerogative to maintain the relationship and get married if they so choose. If the couple chooses to have children, I’m sure both parents consider the idea that their child has the potential to face hardships because of his or her mixed heritage, but it is still the couple’s decision to make. Whether or not this judge had honorable intentions with his ruling, I don’t feel that it’s his place to determine whether or not two adults can enter into union. Furthermore, his assumption that the couple was planning to procreate had no truth to it, from what I read. They hadn’t mentioned children, just marriage.
In my opinion, choosing to enter into a union with another individual is a personal right that should never be denied. I feel that having that relationship with another person an important factor in living a full life, and studies have shown that married people tend to live longer and be generally happier than those who remain single. I don’t think that the law should have any say in who or who cannot get married. Marriage should be as simple as making the decision and planning from there. It doesn’t make sense that the government should have any place in something so personal and sacred as joining two lives together.
The video said that the couple is considering taking legal action in this case, as they should. And it can be predicted (especially with the widespread news coverage) that they will win and be granted their license. But that brings up a whole new idea – yes, this couple will have had to overcome obstacles in order to get married, but what about those individuals who never get the opportunity to experience that same sort of union? It is definitely race, despite the judge’s claim otherwise, that prompted the decision. It was a perfect example of blatant discrimination. But how is that any different from the discrimination that has been in place for years, prohibiting members of the LGBT community to be married? There was a remark made in class by a woman who said she felt that being gay was a bigger struggle than being a person of color, and I believe in some cases, she’s correct. The difference is here in this story – it’s an outrage that this couple was denied the right of marriage, but this is the sad, everyday reality for members of the LGBT community. Our country definitely has a lot of growing to do.
[Reply]
Ok this week I decided to mix it up. I’m not even actually responding to any of the topics online. I am actually going to talk about class. I really love the class, but at sometimes it really boils my blood. Sure we learn interesting things and we get to hear all kinds of opinions that we might never hear otherwise but my issue comes in when we have comments. Now it’s not that I am saying we shouldn’t have comments but the class is a lecture and not a discussion group. I would be happy if it were one or the other. Sure I love posing questions and comments to Sam and I frequently do but what pisses me off is when somebody just raises their hand and says something completely retarded and no one gets a chance to say anything about it.
We had an awesome discussion in class Thursday everyone was really getting into the subject. I made a few comments and so did a few others about the comparison between the black/brown struggle and the gay struggle. It was engaging and respectful, but then somebody behind me made in my opinion a completely stupid comment. We were speaking about how gays can just “pretend” to be straight and take a day off from the discrimination. Now I agree that they shouldn’t have to, but my point is that they can turn off the hate if they act the part. So some girl behind me says well black people don’t have it nearly as bad because nobody is prejudiced against black people and we just stop “acting ghetto”. What in the blue hell is that about? To me that just furthered my point that black people are just as far in the closet about being themselves as are gay people. Acting ghetto. What the fuck. I was soo pissed when she said that and I was glad that the dude had taken the mic by that point. She represents the exact attitude that I was trying to describe. If I act the way I want to act the way I was brought up then I’m ghetto. So as I tried to explain for black people to get anywhere other than where they grew up they have to change themselves and become “white” so they can get ahead. We have to write well, and speak well, and dress well. At least that’s what we call it. Really though just think about it, you could easily replace “well” with “white”. We have to speak the way white people speak and write the way white people write.
It’s crazy, I mean in reality I’m not this militant and radical. I understand the way things are and I don’t sit and dwell on how bad it sucks instead I work to do what I can so that I can grab a spot on top of the hill, then I can speak the way I want to. So don’t let this rant give you permission to label me as an angry black guy. Also I’m not arguing who’s struggle is worse, because I absolutely agree that every struggle is a bad struggle. But do me a favor and don’t ever grab a mic and try to belittle the black struggle, that’s not a good thing. Just saying.
And that’s the bottom line because STONE COLD said so…
[Reply]
I, like many others, found this story to be simply outrageous. I couldn’t agree more with Mr. McCay when he says its crazy that we are in the year 2009 and people still have to deal with this racism. I feel much sympathy towards him and his wife, being that this story made national headlines and everyone knows about what happened to the,. Being that this judge wouldn’t step down, i think he should be fired. I mean, seriously, how can he possibly get away with this. With all the debates swirling over gay marriage, he had to stoop even lower and try and put a restriction on interracial marriage. I thought we as society were past that and it has been accepted, though everyone might not be crazy about it. Mr. Bardwell needs to realize that he was put in a position of power and with that comes a lot of responsibility. One of those responsibilities is to treat everyone equal like it says in our constitution, not how one personally feels they should be treated. It is a shame to me that a man with these types of opinions was elected to such a position of power. Im surprised he hasnt had another situation like this previously since It seems he has held his title for a while. I guess there is some validity to his arguement that he isn’t racist becase being racist means treating only blacks differently. But then i would ask what is he getting at here? Who is he treating differently? If Miss Humphrey were to have been marrying a white man would there be a problem? So it is the black man where the problem lies. I dont really know what Sam is getting at by reminding us that most of us said we wouldn’t adopt a child with ancentry other than our own. I think it all boils down to choice. I know me peronsally i wish to marry a woman of my own race and have children of my own race, but that says nothing about my opinions of interracial marriages. I have no problems with interracial marriages, i just dont wish to participate in one. I mean, i guess if ms. Humphrey and mr. McCay have children they will be of mixed ancestry, but that is something that has been decided between those two, my opinion had nothing to do with it. I am a firm believer people have the right to be happy, and if the person you are happy with is of a different race nothing should be able to stop you from marriage, not even someone like Bardwell. I would encourage the couple to enforce legal action against Bardwell, and continue on in thier plans to get married. If they let this minor problem affect them, then Bardwell wins.
[Reply]
This seems to be a throwback to a blog post from earlier in the year about an interracial couple getting physically abused over the same matter. I don’t know whether the Judge really believes that he is against the marriage because of the “offspring” as he calls it, or whether he actually feels uncomfortable with the fact that it is an interracial couple.
It seems to me that this is more of an excuse that he is telling himself rather than an actual feeling about the situation. Then we have to wonder why a mixed race child is any worse off than someone who is not mixed. Is this because the judge feels that he is in the Immersion stage and that every race should stay within their own racial groups, in order to stay within their own culture and customs? I feel that this could be an argument that he could make. Mixing races is like mixing two very different flavors, they don’t seem like they would match. The tastes and experiences are nothing alike.
Now, I definitely do not believe that, I believe that any couple has its own issues to deal with and a lot of those come from different backgrounds and beliefs. If the members of a couple grew up in very different places or backgrounds, it’s hard to think of a compromise with raising children. Naturally, this is not mutually exclusive of race or nationalities. Two American white people can have very different upbringings which, when the raising of children comes into the picture can have quite a few detrimental effects. Even people from similar socio-economic backgrounds can have problems related to this. In suburbia, for example, you have the families who refuse to allow their children to play video games or watch movies or TV shows that have violence in them, and others that don’t. (I was never allowed to watch the Simpsons as a kid, for example) When these two people end up having children, both would have different view about whether or not violence is a problem in the raising of the children. This type of argument is just as relevant in same race couples as in interracial couples. The judges argument is flawed at best.
Sam asks us to connect this argument with whether or not we would adopt a child from another race or culture. Frankly, I think that the feelings we have against adopting another child is the idea that people would automatically know that that child is not our own. If we take sperm from someone from another race into a same sex couple, it could create a multitude of feelings, not because the child is a different race in society, but because the child is a different race to the parents. Personally, if I were to be considering adoption, race would probably come into the matter, but not in the way of “oh, I don’t want a black child”, but more, I want my children to be like me in personality and so on. Isn’t that what raising a child is really? Trying to create clones of ourselves? That might seem narcissistic, but raising children is more about who you want them to be, rather than who they were born as.
[Reply]
First of all, I have to start off by saying those two reasons that the judge Bardwell gave are complete and utter bull. Talk about a cover up for blatant racism. Last time I checked couples of the same race got divorced as well…? Not everyone’s marriage is going to last forever. That does not mean you can deny people the right to give them a shot at it in the first place just because you think that they have less of a chance of lasting. And as for the whole “wanting to protect the children” bit… first of all, who said this couple was planning on having children? Did he ask them this before he denied them the right to get married? If they do end up starting a family, it is not like these kids are going to be the only biracial children in the whole entire world. There have been plenty before them and there will be plenty after them. They all will have to face the same struggles anyone else faces in their life so why deny them the right to be born!? That right there is a crime in itself. The only types of people that are going to make their lives “difficult” are people like judge Bardwell. So, yeah, he can spit out things such as “in my experience” these marriages do not last and that he is “concerned for the children” but he is not even giving them a shot to get married let alone create a family!
This guy has to be removed from his position as soon as possible. He is straight out denying people of their rights. How can he say he feels like he did not do anything wrong! And why is he still holding his position as a judge!? Helloooo, someone get him out of there. Seriously now, I know there are still so many problems in this world and so many feelings of hatred and racism and all the other corrupt bull shit going on, but how can someone who holds that amount of power be allowed to get away with a decision like this?
I know you can try to call out people and call them hypocrites because of how we answered the question “would you ever adopt a child of another race”. And yeah, I’ll admit I said I would rather not. However, my reasoning was not because I did not want my child to have a difficult life. That is just how many people answered because it is easier to take that route rather than explain why they truly said that. But personally, I think this situation is different than that. I think this is more about the fact that the judge did not want to marry them rather than the judge worrying about the children they would have later on. I feel like that was just a way for him to try and defend himself and to justify his stupid decision.
[Reply]
I think that this case is ridiculous. Although marriage is not free to all people since gay marriage is not legal in all fifty states, any man and woman should be able to get married. There should be no issue of race. If the two people love each other and both consent to getting married that they should be able to in all fifty state s in the country. The issue that the Justice is bringing up is that he does not want to marry the two people because they would have mixed racial children that would most likely be out casted in their daily lives. He may think that he is helping this couple out by doing that but who is he to make that decision. He can not. If those two people feel like having children together and they both feel they will be competent and able parents than they should be able to have kids. There is no law in this country stopping them from doing that and no one should be able to make that decision but them. Another argument along these lines came up during one of our lectures in class in the past week or so where Sam asked the class how we would feel about adopting a child of a different racial group than our own, or of a mixed race. The majority of the class was against it because they said that it would lead to the child being out casted because they were different than us and that we would not be as close to them because we were a different skin color. I some what support this argument. I’m not going to go out and try and stop people from adopting a child because they are of a different race, but if I had the choice I would try and adopt a child that was of the same racial background as my own just to try and avoid all the random questions from people about our relationship and to make things easier for the child. The argument about adopting a child and having a child of mixed race is completely different. If you were to have a child with a person that is a different race than your own you should be able to. Even though the child will look a little different than you, it will not matter because it is your own kid. They would be made from you and the skin color of the child should not matter at all. The fact that this court justice actually thought he was doing these people a favor by this is just ridiculous. I do not think he should be fired but I do think some one should fine him or reprimand him in some way.
[Reply]
This is a really shaky debate because there is so much that could be misinterpreted from a response to this issue, that most people try to find the most politically correct response to it instead of being honest and forward about it. In class in particular, I found that a lot of people chose to ease out of the question by simply saying “for the children”. In my opinion I think that is a flawed response. For the children is a way of getting out of the question without addressing the real reasons why you wouldn’t support a baby of a different race in adoption or marrying out of one’s own race. What is the problem these children are going to face anyways? Are black people saying that they will get picked on by other blacks for having white blood? Are white people saying that they’ll be discriminated against for having black blood? I personally don’t get it. By saying that it’s for the children we are going back to ideologies that I hoped were long behind us. We should move to a less race relevant society so I’m all for the idea of mixing cultures and marrying out of race or adopting of a different racial background. If one’s response is “no way” to these principles then it should be made clear. Be honest about your convictions; just say you’d feel more comfortable with a baby of your own race or marrying a woman/man of your own race. Personally, I respect that more than putting the responsibility for the decision on a baby that hasn’t even come into this world yet. That’s cowardly in my book.
I can understand the basic thought process that most people live by, in that they’d rather marry and have children with their own “group”. However, I feel the difficulty lies more within the adults then the child. The adults having grown up and had a whole life within their own “group” (assuming they themselves weren’t adopted by parents of a different race) are used to their own culture and ways of life. Naturally, it may be difficult to introduce a significant other of a different background to the their respective families. I can see how that process would be difficult. However, with a child that is not the case. I child will grow up and reflect the way he/she was raised. It’s not like you will adopt a young baby and just because their of black origin they’ll grow up to love rap music and wear pants eight sizes to large because of some genetic makeup that dictates that behavior. The child will grow up to be your child and adapt to his/her upbringing. So I think the concern for the child thing is bogus. Yeah at most the child will face having to discuss the setup from time to time, having to explain yeah my dad is black and my mom is white or whatever the case maybe, is that really the worst thing in the world? It’s not like there aren’t millions of people in the world with mixed parents, or adopted into other racial groups. So as far as this article goes I think this Justice of the Peace is full of it, and needs to really reassess his true concerns behind his denying this couple and not cop out with the “it’s for the kids crap”.
[Reply]
Personally I do not think that the Justice of the Peace Keith Bradwell is a racist. I just think he let his personal opinions get involved in the case. I can understand why he did not want to marry Beth Humphrey and her fiancé Terence McKay. Many people today do feel the by being biracial it is harder to adjust in society because you have to balance two identities, but I feel that in the end of the day it is all up to a person. Some people might find it hard but I find that people embrace both their heritage. I think that Justice Bradwell should have just done is job of marrying the couple because it only makes him look bad and makes southern states seem as if they are still racist, even though majority of the population do not believe in how he thinks. Personally I think the more brown people there are in world it will be better for our society because you cannot discriminate against someone who is mixed it would be to confusing because you do not know what their ancestral background is. I would love for people to be in mixed relationships because it shows the modernization of our society to look pass the color of someone’s skin
For him worrying about the future offspring of Humphrey and McKay is false. I’m mixed with Middle Eastern and Hispanic ancestry and I find it to be fun because I can go anywhere and feel that I can blend with any group of people who are of dark features. I think it is interesting that people try to guess my ancestry and most of the time guess wrong. I usually get Native American, Indian, and sometimes part white. I never grew up ashamed or found it difficult to try to find who I am and who I represent. Once again I think it’s the environment a person is in. So many kids who are adopted are from a different ethnicity from the adoptive parents and most of them seem to grow up happy and content with their life experiences.
I feel that when people are mixed they have a better advantage to understanding situations and personally I think I understand peoples motivations and culture much easier than someone who is only from one ancestral background. At an early age I was curious about both of my heritage and dived in to the process of learning and while learning about my own culture I learned about others. I feel that it has benefited me because I was aware about how different and global the world is at an early age. I’m all for mixing the ancestry, and definitely think that no one should be denied marriage and Justice Bradwell is in the wrong.
[Reply]
This is such a strange issue and I am not quite sure what to make of this justice. He claims what he did was not racist but even if he is telling the truth that is certainly what it looks like. But the thing is usually when people act racist they always have an excuse or an explanation of why it was not racist. This justice decided to say that it wasn’t about race for him but the “well-being of their future children”. He then goes on to say that he marries black couples in his house so how could he be racist? Just because he performs marriage ceremonies for blacks doesn’t make him not a racist. All that really looks like is that be thinks that blacks should only marry other blacks. This racism isn’t as black and white (pardon the pun) as what people usually see, this one is a really shady gray area but it is racism all the same. He really should resign from his position for his actions and I’m surprised he doesn’t see why, even if he does think he is right. This justice doesn’t exactly have any proof that the marriage between these two would fail and “his experience” doesn’t really count. The reasons this guy gives are hard to believe as well. This guy thinking about the “well-being of their future children” is complete BS. First off, who is he to make that decision? He isn’t Beth Humphrey or Terence McKay. It is up to those two and those two alone to make the decision on the “well-being of their future children” not this justice. If there are any rough times in their future involving their children and their mixed race then the parents will handle it. Secondly, it isn’t the justice’s responsibility keep marriages together. They marry people. It’s up to those married to keep themselves together so the justice shouldn’t even use that as an argument. It just isn’t his place and this whole situation was created by him over-stepping his boundaries. The couple’s future children and how long their marriage will last isn’t his problem and none of this was his decision to make. Nobody can control how this justice feels and thinks and what his opinions are but once he acts on them and it affects others then it is a problem. This guy really does need to clue a clue if he doesn’t think he did anything wrong. It was an obvious infringement on Humphrey and McKay’s right to choose. It seems like there are a lot more problems in the world of race relations then I thought there actually were. Either that or I am just starting to pay attention to them now. Hopefully people like this justice aren’t multiplying in the world today.
[Reply]
The post, Love vs. Justice open my eyes on how unequal America still is. It boggles my mind how a Justice of peace in Louisiana denies a marriage license for interracial couples. It is crazy how a justice in the 21st century would even think twice about it. It is down right wrong and a violation of the constitutional rights. Bardwell’s reasoning for refusing to issue a interracial marriage license is irrelevant. He claims that he is worried about their children up bring. What gives him the authority to decide whether or not people can marry due to their race and how it will effect their off spring? There are way too many other variables that shape the kids life. They are all the determinist invisible strings. Every single individual has them. Regardless of thier race, children all face challenges with their identity. There are no studies that show interracial kids suffering a tougher time growing up. In today’s society, interracial children are far more common.
In class we were ask about adopting a child with ancestry other than their own or who would not use the sperm or egg of people with ancestry different from their own. The majority of the class was ok with adopting an a child other than their own race and not ok with using a sperm or egg from a another race. I think adopting is approved more because we accept that they will not be the same race and will take on the challenges of raising a child. However, using a sperm or egg other than your own race, the child still has 50% of their parent biological genes. Therefore, the parents would want the same race egg or sperm donation to get the closest outcome as if they were their own. Despite of these opinions, it is the parents preference on how they want to raise/adopt their children. On the contrary, it is not the state, or Justice of peace opinions that decide the fate of interracial children up bring.
What gets me more ticked is that this Jude has been denying interracial couples for 34 years. Think of how many interracial couples that were denied with in the time period. It took this long for someone to actually speak up and pursuit legal actions. One reason I think that no one spoke up was that people in the Louisiana viewed interracial marriage was wrong just because the judge reinforced it by denying the marriage license. Bardwell claims he is not racist, but all his actions gear towards biased and against two people of different race to marry. How is that not racist? Instead, he makes poor B.S excuses, like is concern for the well being of their children. His beliefs and opinions reflect on his decisions towards interracial couples. Therefore, he is racists and discriminating.
Bardwell’s actions have elicited reactions from some top officials, and must resign. He is not representing the people as a whole in the Tangipahoa parish as a whole. He is only representing the people that have the same views as him. It is unethical, and people like him should not have the authority in today’s society.
[Reply]
Justice of the peace, I don’t see this Keith Bardwell guy causing any form of peace. His decision to not grant the interracial couple of Beth Humphrey and Terrance Mckay a marriage license is racist, morally unethical, and just plain irrational. I found it shocking that Bardwell has been working in the parish for 34 years and has not once married an interracial couple. The most surprising thing is that Bardwell doesn’t grant licenses to interracial couples because he hasn’t seen them last long in the past and is worried for their offspring. This makes no sense at all, no matter if the relationship is between black, white, Asian, interracial or any other type of racial relationship there is no way of knowing whether the couple will last. In addition, having a kid has nothing to do with getting married. Some married couples even choose not to have kids this is a complete irrational and lame excuse for not granting interracial couples a marriage license. Bardwell is just using the power he is given through his job to deny couples their right to get married. I have to agree with Beth Humphrey (newly Beth Mckay) in the Anderson Cooper interview, when she says that Bardwell consistently denying interracial couples gives an impression that all interracial marriages are wrong. Beth is right Bardwell is slowly making all interracial couples seem morally and ethically wrong when in fact Keith Bardwell is wrong in every way possible. I believe that Bardwell’s license should be revoked and should also have to stand before a judge in court for his practices. I feel that Bardwell should have to serve a jail sentence for denying interracial couples by not granting them marriage licenses. This is a horrible and racist thing to do.
In class we have discussed how being from a mixed racial family can lead to further difficulties later in life. Children may be put at a disadvantage but, the president of the United States of America, Barack Obama, is half white and half black otherwise known as interracial. To me, being the President of the United State is the greatest position a person can hold on the planet. I know this fact does not prove that interracial children will not have racial difficulties in life but, it does show that they can overcome these challenges. In conclusion, Beth and Terrance as well as everyone have the right to marry whoever they want. No justice of the peace should deny a couple this right just because the color of their skin. Keith Bardwell had gotten away with his racial practices for much too long and should not be reelected for another term of justice of the peace for these ethically and morally incorrect practices.
[Reply]
Love is a feeling that two people are lucky to have for eachother and should be allowed to express that emotion through the bond of marriage. In order for a couple in 2009 to be denied to right to marriage because of their skin color would have to take a judge who is not only racist and unethical, but simply coldhearted. “You can’t help who you fall in love with” is a common saying that is both cliché, and true. These two people want to have a future together, and as we grow up, a part of that future usually includes marriage which gives benefits in sharing insurance policies and other financial burdens which two people cannot benefit from if they are not legally married. I find it even funnier that this judge says “I’m not racist, racism is treating black people differently,” because that’s EXACTLY what he did. He made a decision based on the color of the man’s skin that has negative results for the black man. The fact that this man has the ability to go on camera and speak about this shows that he does not think he did anything wrong, and although he is from Louisiana and I’m from New Jersey where mixed races are probably a bit more acceptable, it is a nationwide law that you can no discriminate based on sex, race, or ethnicity, and to be a judge in our judicial system which is where equality should be demonstrated at it’s finest, he can do this an innocent couple? It’s immoral and embarrassing to me to have someone of such high power in a state act so ignorant, especially when his decisions have a huge effect on how his state functions. Moreover, the judge said his main problem was with their offspring that would be mixed race, but just because they’re not married does not mean they can’t still have offspring, so that point can be completely disproven. Also, to relate to our discussion in class, I said that I would not adopt a child of a different race because of the struggles they would face and I was not up to deal with that, but obviously this couple knows what’s ahead of them and they understand the precautions and they still decided to follow through with it because love is not about the color of someone’s skin or the economic status of their parents, but it is about a mutual feeling of desire, passion, and interest in the other person that is irreplaceable, and if they are willing to stand behind their children which will be of mixed races, let them because it will only integrate our country more. No one has a right to tell someone who they can and can not love, and judge should never have the power to turn down this right, especially due to their race.
[Reply]
Although I think it’s kind of crazy that Keith Bardwell, the Louisiana Justice of Peace, refused to marry the couple, I am not really sure if his actions could be considered racist or not. I think what’s throwing me off is that he said that he has no problem marrying black endogamous couples. If he had refused to marry black or Hispanic or Asian couples, then there would be a problem. I would have no problem calling him a racist and I do not think many people who would deny that his actions were, indeed, racist. However, this situation with the black male-white female couple is quite different. It seems as though Bardwell has no real problem with their relationship. He does not think that their relationship will last because of their racial differences and he also believes that he is thinking about the children, whatever that may mean. I read the article several times, looking for Bardwell’s explanation regarding what he thinks about mixed children, but I saw nothing. I wish someone would have asked him questions about that one. Does he think that the child will be neither black nor white, and therefore will never find acceptance? Does he think they will face excessive discrimination (from people like himself)? Does he think “race-mixing” is just plain wrong? I really wish I knew the answer to that one.
Sam also brought up a good point about the adoption question he posed to us in class and on an ANGEL survey. I consider myself to be pretty open-minded, but I know that I would pretty much never adopt a child of a different race. My reasoning has nothing to do with wanting a child who looks like me or anything like that. I just think it is wrong for me, a black person, to not adopt a black child. Everybody is running to snatch up white or Asian kid and I feel like black children are left in the dust. But not only that – if I am black, why would and should I not take in a black child and provide the best that I (and my husband – there’s no way I’m having any kids on my own) can for them? If I saw a black couple walking down the street with an adopted white child, I would be appalled. Why would you take in a child of a different race, especially a white child, when there are plenty of black kids who need that same assistance and love as the white child, if not more? Something about being black and not adopting a black child just seems wrong to me. There are a ton of little black children out there who need two stable, loving parents and if a black person (married to another black person or a non-black person) can provide that, I think they definitely should.
[Reply]
This is the first time I heard this story. I couldn’t believe this article when I read it. In the interview he starts laughing at the situation. How can you laugh at the fact you denied a marriage based on race alone? This man is clearly racist. He said he won’t resign because he feels he did nothing wrong. He is totally fine with discrimination. This makes me really believe he is racist because he has no remorse for the circumstances he put this couple through. He tries to defend himself by saying he marries black couples all the time. He probably marries black couples because if he didn’t he would definitely be terminated because that would be a clear case of discrimination. Black people marry other black people doesn’t bother him because it has nothing to do with his race. He claims the only reason he would not marry this couple is because of the off spring. Who is he to determine what type of children should be in the world? He is not God. Plus, the couple could still have kids even though they are not married. Married couples aren’t the only ones having children. So for him to say the only reason he didn’t want to marry them is because of the offspring is absurd. Maybe he also thinks people shouldn’t get pregnant and have kids unless they are married. Officials should realize this and investigate the real issue behind this man not giving them a marriage license. He didn’t marry that couple because he didn’t want to see a black man marry a white woman. He goes on to say that many interracial marriages end in divorce. He is trying to make excuses for what he did. Many marriages period, end in divorce not just interracial couples. This man makes no sense when he talks. He can’t dictate people’s life based on what he believes to be just. He is trying to rule his town and make the decisions as to what happens with everyone’s life.
When we had our discussion in class about this subject we were talking about adopting someone else’s baby or implanting another embryo inside of a woman. This is very different from the judge not wanting to marry them because of the offspring. The difference is the offspring would be their biological children. The couple would be birthing their children not an embryo of another. They also wouldn’t be bringing another race into their home. Instead their children will be raised in a biracial home. The children and the parents would feel more comfortable with each other because they are all the same. It is very unbelievable to me that more isn’t being done against this man.
[Reply]
So I find it so unbelievable that a judge would actually prevent two people from getting married because they are of opposite races. This is obviously a form of racism. Anyone who thinks otherwise is ignorant. I’m going to be very harsh towards this man, because what he did was completely wrong. I know Sam said that we have to look at the one survey question, where people said that they wouldn’t adopt a child of the opposite race. I was one of those people. Really I am not sure why I responded with that answer. I justified it with the fact that am white and something so special about having a child is that this human being is a part of you. I guess if I were adopting I would want the child to be similar to me and my spouse. I think if my spouse was Asian, Hispanic or Black then I would be okay with an Asian, Hispanic or Black child, respectively. That’s what I tell myself. Back to the point, I am so glad that there are other governmental officials for Bardwell’s dismissal. Something needs to be done to show that this act of racism will not be tolerated in today’s society.
Now to Bardwell’s reasoning for denying the marriage between Beth Humphrey, and Terence McKay. He said that he did this for the children, and that he doubted the marriage would last. The first thing I do not understand is why this would not be good for the children. He never elaborated on this statement. Is it the fact that he does not think the marriage would work? If this were the case I would expect that Bardwell has prevented other marriages because he does not think those marriages will work out. He never said something to that affect. This first reason is complete bogus. There is no reason for a child having a hard time with parents of different racial groups, especially in 2009. His second reason also has its flaws. Bardwell does not know these two individuals and if their marriage won’t work out. The only thing that he is basing this assumption off of is that they are of two different races. That seems like racism to me. He said that the definition of racism is treating black people differently from white people. This is a horrible definition for racism. But that’s how he sees it in his eyes. Even so the fact that he thinks that a marriage won’t work out because they are of different races but a marriage will work out if they are either both black or white, seems like he is treating blacks different from whites. Either way you look at the situation, this judge is being racist, and needs to be dismissed from his job.
[Reply]
I do not even know where to begin with this subject. I am not ignorant to the fact that racism still exists in this country, even if it is not institutionalized, but it is shocking to hear a Justice of the Peace being blatantly racist, and defending his actions. I am uninterested in his defense that he “marries black people in his own living room.” I also do not particularly care how he chooses to define racism. He will not marry two people based on skin color alone, and to me, that is racist. I was one of the people on the personal survey who said I would absolutely adopt or use the sperm and egg outside of my own race. For one thing, I have seen first hand through my family and the families of my friends, that having a child outside of ones own race can work out perfectly well, for both the children and the parents. Keith Bardwell’s argument that the children would suffer seems to just be his justification for his own racism. It is not surprising that racism exists, especially in the South, but as a government official, Bardwell should know better. It is not surprising that Governor Bobby Jindal immediately called for his removal, stating that his actions were “a clear violation of constitutional rights and federal and state law. … disciplinary action should be taken immediately — including the revoking of his license.” Not only is Jindal acting appropriately as governor, but as many see him as the hope for the Republican Party in 2012, he knows that he must act quickly in identifying the wrong doing of an official in his state. Unfortunately for Jindal, and every other person in Louisiana, Bardwell is refusing to resign. It is almost sad to watch this man speak, because he genuinely believes that what he is doing is the right thing. Not only do MOST marriages, no mater who they are between, end in divorce, but since when has that been the call of a Justice of the Peace? And why does he get to decide that your marriage will not last because of your skin color? In my opinion, if you look at a person, and make a decision about them based only on the color of their skin, without knowing anything about them, that is racism. Even if what you decide about them is entirely positive, if the color of their skin is the reason you feel that way, then you are acting in a racist manor. Until everyone else can come to this realization as well, we’ll be forced to deal with the Keith Bardwells of the world, who feel that their racism is justifiable.
[Reply]
The story on Beth McKay and Keith Bardwell is upsetting for many reasons. Two people should not be denied their right to marriage because they were born into different cultures and races. That’s absurd and exactly the thing our country has been fighting for how long? This is not about adopting a child or using the sperm of someone of a different race. These two people are in love and want to get married and make their own children. These two topics are very similar yet very different.
I do not understand how one man, Keith Bardwell, feels he has the power in himself to deny a couple their right to marriage unless it is so stated in the law. For example, gays and lesbian couples getting married are not legal yet in all states, so that is understandable how he could say no, whether it be right or wrong. However, this is not in the books, and I don’t understand why he thinks he has the power to deny a couple who wants to get married that privilege in our country based on “freedom.” Regardless, I’m just baffled at how this man thought he has the power to deny a couple their choice of getting married and shatter what should be such a special occasion for them.
Not only does a single man not have that power, the state does not either. The refusal of a marriage between two people of different races is not written in stone, and one would think that in this day in age, it would not be questioned. That is racist. That would be racist to have it as a law, and the fact that this man think he is not racist is funny.
The man is clearly racist for not letting a white woman marry a man of a different race. He says his decision is based on statistics, but they could be the minority. No one knows, and plenty of white couples get divorced, as do other couples of the same race. His reason is absolute crap and makes him look ignorant and close-minded. He is clearly lying about his reasons for not granting the couple a marriage license and basing his decision on his opinion of whether or not they get divorced. Even if down the road they do get divorced that is their prerogative and will not affect him.
I honestly cannot imagine going to a court to legalize my marriage and be denied the privilege due to a difference so irrelevant. If you’re in love and want to be married, that should be enough to be issued marriage license. This whole debacle is ridiculous and should not be an issue and it’s sad that in 2009, these kinds of incidents are still occurring here.
[Reply]
This article is very interesting to me because it seems extremely racist but when you dive deeper into it, he actually is treating black and white people the same (as Sam said). It is also pretty commendable that he went through with this and stood up for what he believed in despite the knowledge that he would be heavily criticized by all people. In the era of political correctness and fear of being labeled a racist, this kind of courage is hard to find. I’m not trying to say this judge is a great guy and what he did should be celebrated but one has to look at the situation from both sides of the fence.
I do not agree with his decision to not grant the marriage license to the bi-racial couple. The reason he gave was it would be hard on the children. Whether or not this is the case, the judge should not prevent two people who love each other from getting married. How can he just look right past the love of the couple and instead only be concerned with the children? Does he know the couple well enough to make such a bold statement as bi-racial marriages do not last that long? How can someone with the intelligence of a judge make such a claim based clearly on statistics? It blows my mind what goes through people’s heads sometimes. This very much leads me to believe that his reasoning involved a lot more racism than he is revealing. Then again, he has to be politically correct when it comes to talking to the public so I wouldn’t expect him to come out and say I am racist.
In regards to the comparison between the judge and our soc 119 class’s decision to not want to fertilize their egg with someone of a different race, I do not believe this is a fair shake. We are talking about biology and the creation of life. You cannot compare something like that to denying a person a marriage license for whatever the reason the judge did. I answered that I would not choose to use to sperm of someone from a different race because I feel my child should be like me as much as possible. Is it really that wrong or racist to want to share as much as possible with your son or daughter? It would also make the child’s life a little easier knowing they wouldn’t get constantly questioned about being adopted or being teased by other kids in their school for being different than their parents. I would never have made the decision the judge made for the bi-racial couple but I did make the decision to use a white sperm, therefore, the comparison between the two is obviously flawed.
[Reply]
It’s shocking to me that in the 21st century there is still this kind of outward blatant racism in the world. I feel like this judge most definitely needs to resign but unfortunately he will not do so because he believes he is not a racist. He said the way he views racism is if you treat black people differently than white people or hate people just because they are black but isn’t he treating this black man differently just for the fact that he doesn’t give him a marriage certificate. The judge also during his interview said that he will not marry them because he is worried about the offspring. This might be one of the most disgusting, racists, and hateful thing I ever heard. So I am glad that the couple is taking legal actions against this judge and I hope that when they sue him they take all his money because that kind of racism does not belong in the world today and especially from a judge who is supposed to be fair and unbiased.
I am still confused on how a judge like this one can still remain in their position after they have been found to be racist. Many other people are fired every yearly because they are found out to be a racist. Many people in very high positions amongst companies will be let go or forced to resign when they commit a racist act but why not this judge. His term is over in 2014 but that is not soon enough for me.
I also can’t imagine what the couple is going through. They are constantly being judge for being in a mixed race relationship. Their parents or friends might not be supportive of their choices and they might even be judged for it. When they make it through that kind of struggle and they still want to be with each other they should definitely deserve to be married, right? Not according to this judge he passed his judgment on to these people that would not give them the right to marry each other. That must have been so hard on that couple and I’m glad that they were able to stay together and find a different judge to marry them. They are also trying to sue the judge for not marring them and I hope they win their case. This judge needs to be taught that it is not ok to judge people on their skin color and that if a white girl and a black man want to get married they have every right in the world to do so. I am very interested to see how this story plays out in the future.
[Reply]
After reading Sam’s post, “Love vs. Justice” it was hard not to scream racism, at first. The incident possesses all of the makings of racism. You have a southern white guy with some sort of power that refuses a certain right to a black guy. If you do not read any further, we can all agree that refusing to issue a marriage license to a an interracial couple illustrates racism. Keith Bardwell’s refusal demonstrates characteristics of a racist; however, Bardwell defends his actions by stating “The children would have a difficult go of it down the road”. Bardwell’s assumption is his main excuse for refusing to issue a marriage license. Who are we to assume the life of an unborn child? Will the child not be loved because of his mixed race? I believe a mixed child will go through the same hardships as that of a black child in our society.
Sam reminds us of the dicussion we had in our class about adopting a child of a different race or using the sperm or egg of another race. I believe this is completely different. An interracial couple consists of two individuals who are truly in love and with no other options if they consummate their love. However, a couple that chooses to adopt has the choice of adopting a child of a certain race. These choices allow for a couple to adopt a child of the same race, which will provide an easier life for the child, but if a couple adopts a child of a different race, it does not mean that the child will not be equally love. Some of us decide to adopt a child of the same race because it is easier and the child will look more like us. A child of the interracial couple will look mixed; it is unfair to compare that to adopting a child that is a different race, who does not look the same.
I have two friends who are adopted. Both friends are a different race than their parents. My best friend Andrew is Colombian, but his parents are clearly Caucasian. However, he is loved and has not faced and any struggles because of his differences. My other friend and roomate is black; however, he was adopted by a caring and loving white couple. If he faces any hardships, it is because he is black, not because he was adopted by white parents.
Who are we to deny love to a couple based on their race and the potential hardships for their children? If you look into our society, mixed offspring have done pretty well for themsleves. Our entertainment industry is filled with mixed celebrities such as Alicia Keys and Halle Berry. Also Tiger Woods, who is considered one of the most successful athletes of all-time, is bi-racial. Lastly, a mixed offspring has reached the pinnacle of all position, as the President of the United States (Barack Obama).
[Reply]
I think that this religious guy is ridiculous. The man works in a New Orleans ministry and he won’t marry a mix raced couple. Are you serious? I can’t believe that the man doesn’t believe in biracial marriages. New Orleans and Louisiana is very mixed in races and I really can’t believe that this man would not give these people a marriage license. He is the minister of a mixed race church. What does he expect? People fall in love with people of all different colors, shapes and sizes. If people fall in love, then they can and must be allowed to be in/fall in love. Who is this guy to make this call. He is trying to make the peace. He isn’t doing anything but disrupting the peace. He is just a huge roadblock in the peace making. I can’t believe that this guy is trying to say that the biracial marriage is not appropriate. He is a man of religion and religion clearly states that you should love everyone and love everyone as you love yourself. This man is not in any position to make this call. If God did not want everyone to love everyone another, then everyone would not be the same race. This is why everyone can be different races and fall in love. God just wants everyone to be equal no matter what they look like, what race they are and how they act. Mr. Bardwell needs to follow religion the right way and follow all the guidelines. He can’t nit pick and choose what guidelines he has to follow. He needs to obey all of them. To be a mediator of the peace, he needs to be accepting of all people. He can’t be rejecting some and allowing others to fall in love. This just makes me mad. I hate when I hear about all of these stories of people not being allowed to fall in love. If people fall in love, then let them be in love. There can’t be any of this Romeo and Juliet stuff where people are not allowed to fall in love because of different racial back rounds or social statuses. Then when we through race into the mix, it just pisses be off so much. Why can people just be in love. I can see the whole marring the same social class because they have the same back rounds and stuff, but race. Race is one thing that you just don’t bring into the mix. You have to be accepting of all people. You can’t decide who is allowed to be in love. Love everyone as yourself, no matter what race they are.
[Reply]
I do not agree with the Justice of the Peace’s decision against issuing Beth and Terrance a marriage license. I do not believe that he should single-handedly control the fate of the marriage between a black man and a white woman. If two individuals love each other, who has the right to tell them that they cannot justify their love through the unity of marriage? The love that a black man and a white woman share is no different than the love between a white man and a white woman or a black man and a black woman. I agree with Terrance- to destroy the hope between a particular couple is unethical.
On the other hand, the judge felt as though he was doing the right thing and was simply looking out for the children that Beth and Terrance would inevitably have. Apparently, the judge felt that biracial children are not treated fairly in society. Regardless of whether or not this is the case, the fact still remains that there will always by children that have a father of one race and a mother of another. Biracial children will always exist. For the Justice of Peace to attempt to take it upon himself to deny or change this fact is immoral. What good does it do to deny one biracial couple a marriage license when all over the nation, other judges are making the opposite decision? I feel as though the judge stepped outside of his boundaries.
Sam argued that when we said in class that we would prefer to adopt children of our own race, we would be making the same decision- the decision to protect our children from the hardships that come with having parents of different races- that the judge made when he ruled against Beth and Terrance. I disagree with Sam here because a child that is put up for adoption can either enter into a family of his/her own race or enter into a family of an opposing race. Surely, there is no need to adopt outside of your own race when other adoptive parents exist that would be glad to adopt that Asian child or that black child. It only makes sense in this case, because it’s basically just a matching game. When the judge, however, tells a couple that they cannot be issued a marriage license because he fears for their offspring, he is making a decision for them. If a biracial couple intends to have a mixed child, knowing whatever ridicule might come but still loving the child and accepting the child all the same, there should be no worries on behalf of the judge. Like I said before, the judge stepped outside of his boundaries by attempting to control the fate of a young, biracial couple.
[Reply]
There is a big difference between Judge Keith Bardwell and the Soc 119 class. Our thoughts and opinions about what we would individually do in a situation do not necessarily affect anyone else. But Judge Keith Bardwell’s decision affected a couple, and in a big way. It is one thing to have the opinion that you are not comfortable with interracial marriage, but it is crossing the line when you are in a position of power and forbid interracial couples to get married. He put his own opinions above the law, and in any circumstance in the courtroom the law should always come above opinions. Many people called his actions racist, and I slightly agree with that. It is hard to say if it was racist or just not a good decision. It affected both a white person and a black person, so many would argue that it was not racist. I think it is hard to judge. But I also have to say that those of us in class that said we were not comfortable with adopting a child of a different ancestry or using the sperm or egg of people with a different ancestry may also be racist, as Sam pointed out. I am interested to find out if those who said that they were not comfortable with adopting a child of a different race or using the sperm or egg of someone of a different race would be comfortable with interracial marriage and more importantly if they would deny the right to an interracial couple to marry.
The judge said he did it for the sake of the children. That is really not a fair statement or assumption to make. He is denying people a right based on a chance that the kids may be treated poorly. Many children grow up with a tough life, and many of those children are not of a mixed race. If he did it to protect the children, then he should also deny marriage to people that he thinks do not have a stable relationship, or people with alcohol or drug abuse, or people with a violent past. In all of those situations, the parents could affect their children and the children could lead a bad life.
I do however see both sides of the issue here. Yes it was sad that the couple got denied by this judge, but can’t they just go to another judge instead? The judge made a poor decision because it seems that he put his opinions above the law, but I do not think he should never be allowed in the courtroom again. I think it was more of an issue of personal opinion, than of race. The judge thought he was doing a good thing by protecting the children, but I don’t think that is his call.
[Reply]
When I first read through Sam Richards’s blog post, I thought to myself, ‘Oh, you have GOT to be kidding me.’ Then, I read the CNN article that he linked to, and I kept on thinking the same thing. Then, I watched the youtube video embedded in the blog post, and I almost lost my mind. A justice of the peace of Louisiana decided to deny an American couple the right to be united in (possibly) holy matrimony. I was truly disgusted.
The man claimed that he was not a racist. His definition of racist is something along the lines of treating black people worse than white people. I was surprised that he said nothing about any other races. That was pretty much all he said about what he thought racism was. If he isn’t a racist then why didn’t he just give that interracial couple the right to be married? Well, his reasoning behind that was the offspring. Oh, how cute. He was thinking of the children. This is where my disgust peaked. He doesn’t want the children to be of mixed races. This is one of the most ignorant things I have ever heard in my entire life. I could understand if he had proof that would the couple having a high tendency of being bad parents, but that’s not the case.
There is no such thing as ‘pure’ when it comes to race, anymore. Everyone is mixed in some way. There may be a lot of white people, for instance, in the world, but there are so many kinds of white people. We have the Irish, the Italians, the Germans, the Swedish, and the list goes on. I’m going to go and take a guess that this justice of the peace of Louisiana has given the right to marriage to quite a few white couples. The odds that those white people are 100% of one kind of white person aren’t very likely. This part hit me very hard, especially since I am of mixed races.
If my parents lived in Louisiana and tracked this guy down so that they could get married, he would’ve said ‘no’. If this was really the case, I may not have ever been conceived. His reasoning behind his decision makes no sense, to me. He has no say in whether or not two people should get married, no matter if they are gay, straight, lesbian, bi-sexual, catholic, christian, atheist, muslim, transsexual, or whatever. It’s up to the person who wants to get married to decide who or what they really want to share their life with. You know how there’s a separation between church and state? Well, I feel that there should be a separation between LOVE and state, too.
[Reply]
When looking at the case of the mixed race couple that was denied a marriage license in Louisiana by a judge because of the judge’s concern for the children who might be born of the relationship and that, in his experience, most interracial marriages don’t last, combined with the discussion we had in class about most people’s hesitation to have mixed children, it’s really quite the conundrum.
Does it make you racist if you personally wouldn’t want the egg or sperm of someone of another race to conceive a child? Maybe, but maybe it’s just that you’re worried about the appearances and the looks from the rest of society. But does it make you hypocritical if you don’t want that opportunity denied to people throughout our society? I tend to say no. I feel like you want people to make their own decisions about what’s right for their lives and their children. It may not be the right decision for you to have a mixed race child but you also don’t want people to be discriminated against because they found love in a partner that is not of their own race.
But it’s a fine line to toe, especially if you stress that it would be too hard on the children and that’s your reasoning for not having a mixed race child. Then, if you support the mixed race marriage, and the possibility of those mixed race children, it puts you in a very grey area.
For me, the question is a difficult one. I always believe (and still do) that if I found love in someone of another race, I found love and that’s all that matters. There’s the old adage that love conquers all and I believe in that, especially with relationships, but it doesn’t always conquer it for your children. I wouldn’t want to see my children hurt or suffer or be picked on and discriminated against because of who their parents are. No parent ever does, it’s just natural instinct. You want to protect your child from the dangers and horrors of the world for as long as possible. That becomes somewhat of an impossibility when you have a mixed race child. Your child becomes very aware of who he or she is quite quickly and it can profoundly affect a child and its growth. It would worry me very much if I had a child of mixed race.
Do I think it would prevent me from having a mixed race child? No. But I believe that serious discussions would be needed between my partner and I about whether it was the right environment to raise a mixed race child or if we should look into a more suitable community to raise the child in. Now I’m not going to point my finger and shout racism at anyone who feels differently. Not everyone’s able to raise a mixed race child and I don’t expect everyone to be so willing to do it. But if you support this couple, just know you toe a very grey area.
[Reply]
Considering that half of all marriages end in divorce, I don’t think the judge had much clout in saying he wouldn’t marry Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay. If he is really standing his ground and only issuing marriage licenses to people who will be able to raise happy, healthy, well-adjusted kids maybe he should conduct a few more interviews with the people he issues marriage licenses out to in the first place. People who have already been divorced are more likely to get a divorce when remarried, and the emotional strain of one let alone multiple divorces on kids is overlooked in today’s society, so maybe no previously divorced couple can get married. Once you put a restraint on something, you have to be consistent with it across the board. That’s why I have a problem with this case and the judge. Sure, it’s awful that this couple who loves each other can’t get married just because the odds are against them and the judge is concerned for the well-being of the kids.
What I’m curious about is whether being a bi-racial child is more or less difficult than being a child of divorce, and which the judge was referring to when he made his statement of concern for the future children that would be product of their union. If it was the biracial part he was concerned about, I think living in a happy, loving home where you were able to have the unique experience of having two cultures come together to raise you and seeing people of different races madly in love and serving one another could only help the child as they were growing up and dealing with people of different races themselves. If it was the divorce rate that the judge was concerned about, that’s just ridiculous. The divorce rate among interracial couples is higher, but not significantly more than the divorce rates of couples who are of the same race. There are many factors that lead to divorce so maybe the judge should start screening couples with interviews before marrying them instead of just issuing a marriage certificate based on the similarity of the color of the couple’s skin.
Another point in this blog post that got me thinking was Sam’s comment about how in class he revealed the statistics from the questionnaire that showed that the majority of students in Soc 119 wouldn’t want to use sperm or an egg from a person of a different race. I admit, I was part of the majority on this one. Hear me out; if I was having fertility problems, I would imagine I would be a little embarrassed. Not being able to conceive your own child is still a bit taboo in today’s society, at least in my world. So personally, I would want the baby to be my race so I could in essence “hide” my problems conceiving my own child. Which may sound selfish but it’s true. Also I want my kids to look like me. Like that one girl said in class, she’s adopted and it’s easier for her to go through life without everyone knowing just by looking at a family photo that she’s adopted. It would just make life a little bit easier. It kind of correlates to Thursday’s class, about not having to be upfront about your homosexuality if you don’t want to, it’s something you wouldn’t have to constantly explain to people so they wouldn’t judge you or take everything you said as a product of your “adopted-ness” or your sexual orientation or the fact that you were a sperm bank baby. It would give them a chance to be as normal as possible, which I think is what we all really want.
[Reply]
I believe that interracial couples are very important to America and that for no reason should they be denied the right to marry. I honestly thought that in this era we are past all of the discrimination against interracial couples but news stories like this and consistent hate crimes suggests that perhaps we haven’t gotten as far as I had thought towards race relations. In saying that he doesn’t want to marry the couple because he is thinking about the children and it has nothing to do with the actual couple makes me cringe. It is people who believe that America is going to the dogs and that white people are losing power over America make me very upset in that they can’t see their own hypocrisy. The America we see today is nothing but immigrants. The color that was once seen on this land wasn’t white. To try and stop a future where there aren’t mixed raced people is just ironic and pointless.
[Reply]
It is sad to know that discrimination is going on, but to see it from somebody who is a part of the justice system is even sadder. This country has faced a lot of problems when it comes to racial issues over the years. You would think that at this day and age that people have the right to choose whom they want to marry, whether it be black, white, orange, purple, etc. In the case of the judge he does not see it that way. This sad demonstration of neglect is very ignorant. Who is to speak out about which racial group marries who. At the end of the day no man should judge, criticize, or stop anyone from getting married because of their race because they are in no way, shape, or form serving any justice by doing this. If anything leave everything up to God to make that decision. For this judge his job is to just give the couple there marriage license not to give them a life lesson. If the judge felt that he was doing the good to stop it that is a problem. You cannot make a decision just because you think that the marriage is not going to last especially if there is not a legitimate reason in doing so. He showed poor lack in judgment and really disgraced the justice system. If you actually think about the situation, what if all judges rejected all interracial marriages???? If this were to happen a lot of people who take up higher positions in the country will not exist today. This country might be a lot different than it is. Thank goodness other judges are not as closed minded as he is. I want to know what exactly is wrong with interracial couples getting married? Is it because people think that they will face more problems, but even those couples who get married to the same race face problems as well and they might even face more than the interracial couple. So again who is to really determine this marriage. At the end of the day, does it make you happy when you know that you have just denied a couple of experiencing what is supposed to be the most memorable and happy day all because of their skin color. I am happy to see that some type of action us being taken to make sure that this doesn’t happen again because it is just plain foolishness that could have been avoided. As for the judge, hopefully he has some time to think about his actions and reevaluate himself on life especially when it comes to seeing interracial couples together and asks himself as to why does he feel the way he does. Anyways I am happy that a more sensible judge finally gave the couple their marriage license so they can finally live the life they want to live.
[Reply]
This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I’ve heard of denying homosexuals marriage licenses because it’s against the law in some state (which I do not agree with either). But because it’s an interracial relationship this is crazy. The judge’s statement that, “his definition of ‘racist’ is when you treat black people differently than white people. By not issuing the marriage license he’s actually treating black and white people the same!” is also ridiculous. As crazy as it is that statement is kind of true, but it was ignorant for him to say. How can you tell someone who they can and can not love? This goes back to whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to get legally married as well. Because people have their opinions on how society should be and want everyone to conform to that.
Just because there is a statistic that says that most interracial marriages end in divorce, does not give him the right to deny this particular couple. If that is the case than no marriages should be allowed, because as of recently the divorce rate has sky rocketed. People will love regardless if they are accepted by others, so I do not understand why people continue to have hatred for the love others have. Spending your time be angry towards someone else is not healthy anyway, people should putting out positive energy and not negative.
I will admit that I probably never will date outside my race, because I have a preference towards the men who are the same race as me. But I do not have a problem with those who are in love with others outside their race, same sex, etc. What others do does not have an affect on my life so why make them feel bad for their choice.
I do believe that this judge not signing their licenses was very racist. It is racist because historical interracial relationships were look down upon because they did not want white women marrying black men and vice versa. So maybe his intention was not to be racists, but it was racist because it was probably done because he did not want the white woman marrying the black man.
Coming to Penn State has opened my mind to more cultures and people dating other races. Living in Washington, DC which is a predominantly Black city I was not use to seeing too many interracial relationships. If I saw a couple it would be a little weird to me, but I never looked down on it. People have the freedom to do what they want, and my opinion or others should not be said because it is none of our business.
[Reply]
It is wrong that Bardwell is deciding what is good for someone else. He’s not letting people live their own lives on their own values. That is the difference between this story and someone choosing to adopt a child of their own race over another race. The problem is that there is obviously still an issue and concern for mixed race children. In an open and advanced society, there should not be a problem.
I don’t think Bardwell was intentionally being racist, and he was actually doing what he thought was right. The problem is that the government is deciding who we should and should not love. They have no right deciding which couples – gay, straight, mixed race – are better and more suited for marriage. That is a personal choice and everyone should have the right.
I hope that no one who finds this justice wrong for denying them marriage license because of race thinks this is any different than denying gays marriage licenses. The law is denying gay marriage, but only a couple justices are denying mixed racial marriages.
Denying people the ability to live their lives happily is wrong. That’s what the justice is doing, and that’s what the government is doing to the gay community. It is the same thing, so why aren’t more people mad about that??
Back to the race issue. Bardwell was not right by any means to deny them a marriage license. He may think that he was not being racist because he marries black people all the time, but he was denying them marriage because of race. That is being racist and discriminating because of race. Why does anyone else even have this power to decide who we can and cannot marry? This does not make sense in today’s society.
I also do not understand why children are brought into this issue. Marriage does not equal children, and what gives anyone the right to decide what children can be born. Nothing about this decision is right, whether anyone thinks Bardwell is racist or not.
This does not even compare to the fact that the majority of our class said that we would choose to mix the sperm and egg of someone of our race. This is someone deciding who can be in love and procreate. The decision of the class is how to make our own lives easier. It’s as simple as that.
Again, I do not think this is as much an issue of race as it is someone’s ability to decide who should be able to marry and who shouldn’t. The marriage system in the United States is obviously flawed and should be open to everyone. Most marriages already end in divorce and unhappy children, so what are they afraid of?
[Reply]
I find Keith Bardwell’s title of “Justice of the Peace” to be somewhat ironic. Peace? This man’s personal opinions of interracial couples should not, and legally not able to be exhibited in his decision making. A major factor in his job is to be as unbiased and objective as possible. However, his overt racism disgusts me. In his words verbatim, he defines racism as “hating black people or treating black people different from anybody else.” Allow me to reiterate this statement: Treating black people differently constitutes racism in Bardwell’s opinion. How hypocritical of this ignorant man – obviously he is treating Terrance McCay differently; he’s not giving him a marriage license! Secondly, that is just a terrible definition in general – obviously racism does not only apply to black people. That alone makes me question his intelligence in general… too bad he couldn’t have taken Sam’s class.
His reasoning in this situation is absurd to me. He has no right, as a Justice of peace or a person in general, to try and dictate this couple’s decision when it comes to their offspring. Whether or not they want to have children, that is their decision. The nerve of that man to think he can intervene.
I must admit, at the beginning of the semester I was one of the majority in the class who stated they would not use the sperm of someone I didn’t know who had a different ancestry than me. I would consider adoption of someone of a different race, but if I was going to use a donor’s sperm to have a child I would prefer to use sperm from someone of my own race. As I step back and think about that, it makes me a little uneasy. Granted, having a child with a white man’s sperm would probably make the child’s life easier… Or would it? I guess before I took this class, I never would have even considered using sperm from a different race if I happened to be in that situation. However, now that I’m really thinking about it and questioning my subconscious intentions, I try and reflect on what makes me think this way. Like Sam said, a baby is God’s child—regardless of race.
The other reasoning Bardwell gave is the fact that interracial couples are more likely to divorce. Well, that’s not true. Statistically speaking, I did my research and there does not seem to be any research that breaks down factors in divorce such as race, religion, etc. The divorce rate is high at 50%, regardless of the involved factors. So maybe he supposes that interracial couples are more likely to divorce, but considering he has no facts to back him up, this statement only makes him look like an idiot. Although I’m sure there are fellow idiots who believe everything they hear and would agree with him. (Keyword: FACTS).
It’s pathetic and sickening to me that episodes like this are still happening. There is a black man in the Oval office, and racist men like Keith Bardwell are still in powerful positions making decisions that will affect people’s lives tremendously. People have the right to marry whoever they want, and people like Bardwell should not try and stop them. It’s a great thing that love conquers all.
[Reply]
Love vs Justice
I have to say that I have mixed feelings about this case. The couple is interracial, yes, and there is no low against issuing them a marriage license. A single Justice refused to personally issue this couple a license, but he did not even attempt to hinder their quest to obtain one in any way. His wife even told them of another one. I feel that he was just acting on a personal belief that we, as Americans, are free to have and act upon. From what I can tell, he did not degrade or punish the couple, he simply denied their request. They asked for something, and he said no. That’s it. When they came to him, the Justice could have ran to the phone and called the nearest KKK chapter and tell them what was going on, but he didn’t. He just said no. Say you walk into McDonalds, ask for a Big Mac, and the cashier asks you if you’d like fries with that. If you answered no, would it end up all over the news? Probably not.
There is another side though. The Justice is holding a government position, and the constitution prevents any government officials from denying marriage between a man and a woman because they are not the same race. It is my understanding (and I could be wrong) that this law was made with African Americans in mind. That said, the law would allow blacks and whites to marry. But what about the other “races”? If we’re talking in terms of ‘color,’ what about the brown people and the yellow people? The law, though it could have not been brought up or thought of at the time, also includes people of these races. My question is, if this Justice (just as an example, I’m not saying that he is or isn’t racist) was asked to give a marriage license to a white woman and an Asian man, would he have also refused?
I can understand why the couple is angry. They’re allowed to feel that way, but they still got married. Didn’t they? They just had to ask someone else.
I can understand why the Justice refused. In his mind, there is a legitimate concern for the quality of life of an interracial child. He is also allowed to feel that way. As a government official though, it is his job to not let his personal views interfere in his decision making, just like a judge. On the other hand, if put in the same situation with same belief, I can’t say what I would have decided or done.
I think that’s how we have to look at these issues. Society is so quick to jump to racism, but it IS possible to have personal beliefs about something other than ‘hating’ people of another race.
[Reply]
I was one of those people that was kind of skeptical towards putting some one from a different race’s sperm in my egg. I thought it was OK to adopt someone from a different race, but after that girl in class spoke about how it was too personal for her to share that fact that she’s adopted made me wonder even more. Who should we adopt? Should we adopt from our own race and protect our child from other people or should we just help the child and adopt it?
Marriage however, is not something you can really compare to such a thing. Adopting is one thing, but marriage is another. We cannot really compare the two situations. Because you are producing a child that is multiracial out of love, no one has the right to stop you from doing that. Seperating two people that have the right to be together just because you have the power to is unjust, he can not predict the future, he can not take away the right to love and the right to reproduce just because he thinks it may be too risky. I do not know how an adopting agency works, I do not know if they deny white parents the right to adopt colored kids, but that also is not right. It all depends on how strong the parents can enforce their love and prepare themselves and the child on how to handle these situations. When you actually are conceiving the baby, the parents are more prepared, they know what they are getting themselves into. No one should ever take the role of deciding what is best for a couple that already know what he or she want and have already considered the consequences.
I discussed gay marriage with a few of my friends, and their rights to adopt. It was really interesting to hear what people have to say. How people think amazes me, some people argued that they would not really mind having a friend with gay parents, but they also did not really feel comfortable with gay people. Then what kind of friendship would you foster if you could not really accept their parents?
The man that is denying marriage to the multiracial couple may be looked upon as an unjust evil man. But when we think about it, he is the only one that is really standing up for what he believes in. He is taking away their right to love, which is taking away their rights. But he is only doing it because he is concerned about their future. This is racist, even if he marries black people with each other, he still wont marry one race with the other- that means he thinks that one race is superior to the other. You don’t wanna marry two different races is one thing, but you thinking that denying someone’s right as a human to love is just- get a life!
[Reply]
I think that I am no racist because I like to be nice whit all the people. I remember when I was in the class when Sam talked about adopting a children whit different ancestry. I think this is not a big deal because if one day I decided to adopt children that have different ancestry I was to be happy. If I adopt one I adopt Asian children because I like the eyes that they have. Adopting children that you know that he had different parents that have different cultures it is very good because you do not make racism to other children when you chose children that have the same ancestry than you. But if you chose a children that have different culture your family start to make racism whit this children. One example is my family because my aunt adopts a black children and my family start to say bad things about her children. They say to the black children “negrito” but they do not understand what they says but when I heard my cousins say thing to his I get really angry and I have to protect this little kid. In my opinion adopt a children whit different ancestry it is nothing bad for me.
Another thing that people make big deals is use the sperm or egg of people with ancestry different from your own. Just because they think that mixed ancestry is bad because they believed in the words that they past ancestries say. Mix ancestry is the big thing for me because if you mix different ancestry you have a new type of ancestries. In case mix ancestry is really bad to my parents because they want that I will have my own children whit the same culture than me. So if I want to use the use the sperm or egg of people with different ancestry my parents no not be conform and never help me.
The last thing that I think that people do not conform and do many things to make this impossible is get married whit different people than you. When a black boy get married whit a white girl the family of the white girl makes them life impossible. Treat a black people different than white people is racist because in the world we are the same but the people can see or they do not what to see the real thing that have a rich value in the life. in my opinion this three things that people think that is impossible I think that it is the pretty thing that people do because if you get married whit other people that have different ancestry you can learn many different things about other culture.
[Reply]
I can’t understand how something like this is even allowed by law. Before the Loving v. Virginia case of 1967 this type of thing was very common but that case was just the beginning of the change in laws allowing blacks and whites to get married in the United States. 42 years later a judge’s refusal to marry an interracial couple screams racism to some (despite Professor Richard’s statement that it isn’t) but to me it screams pure ignorance. I feel like this judge is missing the true definition of a marriage. Two people (in most cases) do not solely get married to procreate. It is usually to be able to spend the rest of their lives with each other. Plenty of unmarried couples have children at the same rate that plenty of people get married with no intentions of having children. Furthermore as far as this judge saying that his reasons are more so for the sake of the offspring I take it he does not realize that this issue really does not concern him. If this is the case then maybe he is in the wrong field and should open up a safe haven of some sort for biracial children to come, get counseled, and feel accepted regardless of whatever problems (if any) they might face because of their race. Growing up in a two parent home in which my parents were married and observing the people that I knew living in a one parent home which their parents never married I feel like I had an easier life. I think that if this judge was really concerned about the offspring he would issue this couple the marriage license so that they can have a stronger bond which often times makes for a healthier household. I realize many people may not agree but I personally am very proud that my parents were married before I was born and are still married now and I feel that most children growing up will have the sense of security knowing that their parents are legally together as I did.
If I’m not mistaken The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is a declaration adopted by the United Nations in 1948 which applies to all countries having any associations with the UN. Article 16 of the UDHR states “Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. . .” so wouldn’t this judge be going against what it written in this declaration.
I wonder if this couple had children prior to going to obtain a marriage license whether or not this judge would issue it or not. If this were the case the children are already here so what would his argument be then?
[Reply]
Louisiana Justice of the Peace Keith Bardwell is an example of how some people in the United States are still in the dark when it comes to race relations. I really don’t believe that this man hates people of different races nor do I think he disproves of interracial relationships that do not result in children. In my eyes, he is a man who is just extremely ignorant and is following a completely misguided belief that children from an interracial marriage bring children into a horrible situation. The fact is that he is actively trying to prevent two people from sharing their love is messed up, but that he is doing it to keep biracial children from being born is more twisted than he understands. He thinks he is doing these unborn children a favor by keeping their parents from being wed, but it is only serving to skew racial relations even more in this country, further alienating biracial people.
The funny thing is that it doesn’t seem like this guy is actually racist in the sense that he hates black or brown people. At least to me it doesn’t look that way. When I read the articles and see what he has to say, I don’t see a potential KKK member. I see a man who was brought up in a society that never required him to learn how to deal with races other than his own. The result is that he makes decisions about serious racial issues without having the slightest clue as to what the proper response is or what the implications of his actions are. He decided that Beth Humphrey and Terence McKay should not be allowed to be wed not because he disproved of their love, but because he thought their child would have a hard time growing up. Because he refuses to apologize, he is demonstrating that he still believes what he is doing is correct. Also, he will not admit he is racist and denies the claim, citing the fact that he has wed black couples inside his own home. He said he believes a racist is someone who hates black people and treats them differently. It sounds exactly like a man who doesn’t understand the full complexity of racial relations and the effect certain actions can have. That is why he does not see his actions as a big deal. The fact of the matter is that his actions are a huge deal and they are wrong. After he has stirred up all of this trouble, it is bizarre he can not look in the mirror and admit he is wrong and he may not be unbiased after all. He might have to have a moment of reflection that we all have to have at some point and ask ourselves how much bias we really do live with and how that has inadvertently affected people we talk to our interact with.
[Reply]
This article is completely ridiculous. I am actually at a loss of what to say about this and that is shocking for me because I usually have a lot to say. This guy does not mean to be racist, because he does wed black people, so that makes him okay, right? NO, because of the fact that he refuses to wed an interracial couple I don’t even know what to say. I think that he is putting himself in situations that he shouldn’t. He says he is concerned for the wellness and overall health of the couple’s future children, however, I do not think it is his place to decide or judge that this is the reason for them not to get a marriage license. I am sure that the parent’s are more than capable to decide to reproduce and realize the consequences and repercussions of doing so. However, what really bothers me is that he said, “Mixed race marriages often end in divorce,” really? Is this guy serious? I think he just sounds like a downright idiot at this point. I feel that this is more than a race issue but it is bigotry and ignorance. Also, divorce rates do not matter if you’re black, white, brown or purple. IT is individuals and the way they relate to one another. This is just a ridiculous statement all around and the more i think about it the more I can’t believe that this guy was elected judge.
However, I do think about the time Sam asked us in class if we would accept the sperm of another ancestry than your own and it got me thinking. I am annoyed and frustrated with this judge however, I should put it into perspective because I was one of those individuals who raised their hand with uncertainty. So does this make me a racist and bigot as well? I am not outwardly rejecting it however I would reject the sperm. When I look at it this way I do not know how mad and annoyed I can be with this judge. Yes, it is different, because he had “decided” the fate of the other couple (until they found another person who would give them a license) by denying them, but for me I would be choosing my own fate by denying this sperm. I guess that is why this has gotten so much criticism and scrutiny because of the fact that it is an outside party deciding how another person should live their life. Again, who is he to decide for this couple in love that they should not wed or have the ability to receive a license? It beats me I honestly have no idea why this judge believes that he can use his personal morals and beliefs to make decisions of law. It is ethically wrong for a person to use his own ideals to make decisions about law and law related facts.
[Reply]
I was absolutely appalled when I first started reading this article. It boggled my mind that someone could actually tell a couple that they could not get married due to their race or ethnicity. But when I started to think deeper I understood that this may not be a racism issue it is more of this man’s personal opinion. I do not think he was being racist I think that he was looking out for the interest of the child. I still believe that this is wrong of him to deny the right of these people to get married in regards to his personal opinion. He should not have told them no because it is his job to marry people and it is not right for him to involve his opinion. Still though I do not think he should have denied them the right especially when it says nothing in the constitution about interracial marriages. I am in a interracial relationship right now and really hurts me to know that people still think that it is a problem. It is nobody else’s business. It should be the people’s choice and opinion who are getting married that matters. In a way a understand the conflict going on between granting gay and lesbian people the right to marriage but this is a completely different issue. In our society we should be more concerned with the children who are born into these kinds of relationship and making sure they are treated fairly rather than saying it is not aloud because that is a whole other issue. We should be focusing on the real issue and that is why will these children be treated unfair, why will it be harder for them in today’s society? In our country it is all about freedom and having the right to make our own decisions. So why is it ok for this man to deny them the right to marriage? I think that something should be done to this man like maybe revoke his license for making such a stupid decision. Although his intentions were not to be racist in our society that can only be taken one way and that is him being racist. Just like your are not allowed to bring your personal opinion into school or the workplace it should be the same with this man’s job. It is not his place to decide this person’s happiness or how their children’s happiness will be. Whether or not he is being racist he is still wrong. I think that he needs to give a public apology to these people because it is so wrong for him to tell them his opinion because in this situation his opinion does not matter.
[Reply]
In response to “Love vs Justice,” it is very ridiculous and racist that these two people were not issued a marriage license. In response to what Sam said about how in class people said that they wouldn’t want to adopt a child from another ancestry group and so forth and asking how this is any different. I think it is very different because if I wanted to adopt a child, that would be my choice and I could choose a baby that looked like me or one from China. I would be allowed to adopt either one. No one would tell me I couldn’t adopt a Chinese baby because I’m white. These people are flat out being denied the right to get married because of their race. It doesn’t matter what the judges reasoning for it is, whether he’s racist, thinks the marriage won’t last, or is worried about the children. It is wrong for him to not allow these two people, who are in love, to not be married. I feel this is absolutely racist and cannot be taken any other way. However, if I chose to adopt a baby that had a similar ancestry to mine, I don’t feel that is racist. If my wife and I were both white, then I’m sure we would probably adopt a white baby. If my wife was Asian, then we probably would adopt an Asian baby. I really don’t see how these things can be compared on the same level. I’m sure some people would choose to adopt a baby with similar ancestry to them because they are racist and do not want a baby of another color. But, this certainly cannot be said for all people who adopt babies that look “like them.” However, it is almost non debatable that a judge not allowing an interracial couple to be married is racist. People have the right to get married to whoever they want with a few exceptions (family members or people underage), people also have the right to adopt any child they want. When that right is taken away because of race, then there is definitely a problem. The judge should not be allowed to do this, and it is ridiculous that these things still even happen in our country today. There needs to be many changes that take place before race relations really start to improve. Allowing judges to make these kinds of rulings only further separates everybody. Race is still a huge issue in our society today, and this is a prime example of how things really have not changed that much over the years. It is sad to think that things like these are somewhat common place.
[Reply]
Throughout the nation ignorance and racism still continues to surprise me each and every day. After reading the article, “Love vs. Justice,” I really found it disturbing how someone like the justice of peace can be so arrogant to reject an inter-racial marriage proposal. No one has the right to tell someone that they can or cannot marry another human being because of race or ethnicity. This is a huge step backwards in the racial spectrum for our society and our struggle for equality. It’s amazing how he says that he is not a racist and explains his reasoning by saying “it is unfair for the children.” This is ridiculous how anyone could do that to a couple in love and stop their marriage, which are their own rights. This man needs to either resign for himself or be fired as quickly as possible. It really is a shame that we still face these racial problems in the year of 2009. We have to look beyond the past and treat everyone the same, no matter their race, origin, or ethnicity.
I also am shocked how this man, the justice of peace, can sit there and talk about it as if he is doing nothing wrong, by even declaring himself as not a “racist.” Its pathetic how after everything America has been through, there is still such great arrogance in people like Keith Bardwell. I hope there is a full out investigation and that this man is fired and never allowed to work as a justice of peace again. We are not “protecting” the children if we don’t allow interracial marriages, but are only making it worse by doing so. Everyone has the right to fall in love with whomever they desire to, no matter their skin color, religion or ethnicity. This is just another happy coupled that have fallen in love and want to continue you that to marriage. It really is shocking how there are stories like these that continue to pop up and cause controversy within our nation.
Also, about what we talked about in class, the adopting a child with different ancestry issue, I feel as if that is only triggering more racism. By saying that their children will have a bad and difficult life is just wrong. We must not look at is as wow they are interracial children, but we should realize that he or she is no different and that every child should be treated the same. We as a society must turn away from the continuing racism and ignorance and try to change the outlook of such people. Racism is a serious issue that continues to haunt our society and we must stop this immediately.
[Reply]
Sam wrote that we should all think about the number of us who said we would not adopt a child of a different race or who would not use the sperm or egg of someone from a different racial background. I don’t think that these two issues go hand in hand. Maybe in an ideal world no one would care about mixing races, but that’s not the case, there are a lot of people who won’t (as shown in class). Just like there are people who would not adopt outside of their race, there are people who would not marry outside of their race. But this is a case in which two people of different racial backgrounds wanted to get married and the Judge said no. If this issue were to relate to anything it would be as if a couple wanted to adopt a baby of a different race and they were told they were not able to. This is not based on people’s own opinion of what they would personally do.
I am all about the biracial marriages. Well maybe it’s because I’m the product of one, but who knows. The judge said that he declined the marriage because his main concern was for the children. I just think that’s bull shit and people are just afraid of what they don’t know. Yea sure being mixed has its down side (as does everything), but it also has a positive side too. I think that by being mixed I have grown into a well rounded person, who has had the privilege of being influenced by more than one culture. Just by looking at me people know that I am mixed, but could say that I have been influenced more by “white” culture, based on maybe what I wear or where I am from. What people don’t know is how I interact with the “non-white” part of my family or the places I have been or the people I have met because of my Hispanic half. I’d say the cultural influences that I have experienced are a lot more different than any white kid who grew up in my same neighborhood. I wouldn’t have it any other way.
It’s all about embracing who you are. The judge said that he has married black couples before, and from what we have learned in class, one could argue that there is also a high probability that the kids from that marriage will have issues based on their race as well. Why isn’t he concerned about them?
[Reply]