Interracial couple denied marriage license in La.

2009-10-15 14:16:50

#1

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5598

A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

Neither Bardwell nor the couple immediately returned phone calls from The Associated Press. But Bardwell told the Daily Star of Hammond that he was not a racist.

"I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house," Bardwell said. "My main concern is for the children."

Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.

"I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer."

If he does an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said.

"I try to treat everyone equally," he said.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art … wD9BBOKIG0
Clearly the judge has never heard "once you go black you never go back"

Seriously though isn't that just horrible? Love is blind IMO.

2009-10-15 14:23:41

#2

aimless: Member; +166|6138|Texas

That's awful, it's not his decision to decide if a marriage will work.

2009-10-15 14:26:42

#3

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5371|London, England

They could always have someone else perform the ceremony. If it's against what the man believes, no matter how silly, it's not the courts right to force him to do anything he doesn't want. It's him who is losing the money from refusing to perform the ceremonies, not the state or anyone else.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-10-15 14:27:04)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2009-10-15 14:26:53

#4

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|6749|Salt Lake City

I don't know why the kids wouldn't be accepted. Just look at Haley Berry. Now that is one hot woman! She is also from a mixed marriage.

2009-10-15 14:56:14

#5

Ilocano: buuuurrrrrrppppp.......; +341|6680

Someone needs to research the judges gene pool. No one is 100% these days.

2009-10-15 15:04:49

#6

Mekstizzle: WALKER; +3,611|6634|London, England

Ilocano wrote:
Someone needs to research the judges gene pool. No one is 100% these days.

Yeah, especially African Americans. It's almost guaranteed that they have some sort of non-African blood in them.

It goes more (Racial mixing) for countries like the USA/New World countries than here in the "Old World" though.

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-10-15 15:05:36)

2009-10-15 15:29:46

#7

Hurricane2k9: Pendulous Sweaty Balls; +1,538|5714|College Park, MD

how fucking stupid

yet another reason we should get rid of the whole 'marriage' thing from the law books all together

edit: what's stopping them from raising a child out of wedlock anyway? Seriously this is just pure racism/bigotry plain and simple, with a serving of ignorance and idiocy

edit 2: Maybe in fucking "Tangipoha Parish" a mixed kid isn't readily accepted, but in any worldly city like NYC, DC, San Francisco, LA etc they're just like everyone else

Last edited by Hurricane2k9 (2009-10-15 15:31:30)

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/36793/marylandsig.jpg

2009-10-15 16:25:32

#8

Diesel_dyk: Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears; +178|6007|Truthistan

JohnG@lt wrote:
They could always have someone else perform the ceremony. If it's against what the man believes, no matter how silly, it's not the courts right to force him to do anything he doesn't want. It's him who is losing the money from refusing to perform the ceremonies, not the state or anyone else.

I cry BS on this one. The guy is a JP, I'm pretty sure that's an elected office in LA

Nevertheless, the man holds a governmental office. The constitution appies to him and ever since the Loving decision its not within his discretion to deny this couple a marriage license... this judge states he is not a racist /facepalm. If he can't or won't do the job he was elected to then he should GTFO.

2009-10-15 16:32:36

#9

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5371|London, England

Diesel_dyk wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:
They could always have someone else perform the ceremony. If it's against what the man believes, no matter how silly, it's not the courts right to force him to do anything he doesn't want. It's him who is losing the money from refusing to perform the ceremonies, not the state or anyone else.
I cry BS on this one. The guy is a JP, I'm pretty sure that's an elected office in LA

Nevertheless, the man holds a governmental office. The constitution appies to him and ever since the Loving decision its not within his discretion to deny this couple a marriage license... this judge states he is not a racist /facepalm. If he can't or won't do the job he was elected to then he should GTFO.

If it's a government office then yes, he can't be racist like he is. I always thought JP was a bs side gig.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2009-10-15 19:54:13

#10

Diesel_dyk: Object in mirror will feel larger than it appears; +178|6007|Truthistan

JohnG@lt wrote:
Diesel_dyk wrote:
JohnG@lt wrote:
They could always have someone else perform the ceremony. If it's against what the man believes, no matter how silly, it's not the courts right to force him to do anything he doesn't want. It's him who is losing the money from refusing to perform the ceremonies, not the state or anyone else.
I cry BS on this one. The guy is a JP, I'm pretty sure that's an elected office in LA

Nevertheless, the man holds a governmental office. The constitution appies to him and ever since the Loving decision its not within his discretion to deny this couple a marriage license... this judge states he is not a racist /facepalm. If he can't or won't do the job he was elected to then he should GTFO.
If it's a government office then yes, he can't be racist like he is. I always thought JP was a bs side gig.

Yes, its a govt office. When I see a story like this, I have to shake my head because the Loving decision by SCOTUS is now 45 years old but then again its the south.

I expect this guy will get removed by the state supreme court

2009-10-15 21:28:50

#11

DrunkFace: Germans did 911; +427|6694|Disaster Free Zone

Cause it's just impossible to fuck and have kids before you get married!

2009-10-15 21:30:44

#12

blademaster: I'm moving to Brazil; +2,075|6658

I know rite lol but yeah people these days

2009-10-15 22:02:02

#13

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6165|what

He is just reinforcing the problem he claims to be going on to justify his actions...

2009-10-17 11:41:25

#14

Masques: Black Panzer Party; +184|6735|Eastern PA

"I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer."

They might have to suffer being President one day...*sniff*

2009-10-17 13:35:00

#15

Bradt3hleader: Care [ ] - Don't care [x]; +121|5949

Well, love is blind yes. It would be "Suffering" as he calls it: to not marry the couple.

2009-10-17 13:39:30

#16

krazed: Admiral of the Bathtub; +619|6792|Great Brown North

Masques wrote:
"I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer."
They might have to suffer being President one day...*sniff*

thats what i was thinking

2009-10-19 11:33:13

#17

Lai: Member; +186|6164

Macbeth wrote:
A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

Neither Bardwell nor the couple immediately returned phone calls from The Associated Press. But Bardwell told the Daily Star of Hammond that he was not a racist.

"I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house," Bardwell said. "My main concern is for the children."

Bardwell said he has discussed the topic with blacks and whites, along with witnessing some interracial marriages. He came to the conclusion that most of black society does not readily accept offspring of such relationships, and neither does white society, he said.

"I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer."

If he does an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said.

"I try to treat everyone equally," he said.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art … wD9BBOKIG0
Clearly the judge has never heard "once you go black you never go back"

Seriously though isn't that just horrible? Love is blind IMO.

Being 50% Vietnamese 37.5% Dutch and 12.5% Danish, that means I can pretty much marry no-one (that might actually be correct though, with my record ). I wouldn't call love blind, but certainly things like interraciality or interculturality don't matter. That said, I do not consider this Bardwell to be rascist. He might unconsciously promote racism by "maintaining the gap", but his opinion or actions on themselves, however wrong, are not rascist.

2009-10-19 11:40:07

#18

Surgeons: U shud proabbly f off u fat prik; +3,097|6502|Gogledd Cymru

aimless wrote:
That's awful, it's not his decision to decide if a marriage will work.

Pretty sure it is. He's got the right to refuse service to anyone, he's not breaking any laws by not marrying two people.

2009-10-19 11:56:16

#19

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|6749|Salt Lake City

The Sheriff wrote:
aimless wrote:
That's awful, it's not his decision to decide if a marriage will work.
Pretty sure it is. He's got the right to refuse service to anyone, he's not breaking any laws by not marrying two people.

As noted, the JP position is a government position, not a private business. As such, he does not have the legal right to determine whose marriage will and won't work, nor the ability to deny a legal marriage.

2009-10-19 12:01:25

#20

Masques: Black Panzer Party; +184|6735|Eastern PA

The Sheriff wrote:
aimless wrote:
That's awful, it's not his decision to decide if a marriage will work.
Pretty sure it is. He's got the right to refuse service to anyone, he's not breaking any laws by not marrying two people.

Actually, as an official licensed by the government he can't refuse two people who can be legally married, at least not for his stated reason. He is subject to having his license revoked.

The Attorney General's office has told me I'm in violation of the law, but I have the right to recuse myself. I don't feel like I've done anything wrong.

http://www.fox8live.com/news/local/stor … AMXwA.cspx

And his reasoning is wrong. Since he is in violation of the law (and has acknowledged a pattern of behaviour) his license is in jeopardy.

EDIT: I should add that the LA code of conduct for judicial officers requires that they carry out their duties "without bias or prejudice". Refusing to marry interracial couples clearly constitutes "bias or prejudice", despite what Bardwell's personal thoughts may say.

Last edited by Masques (2009-10-19 12:07:20)

BF2S Forums Interracial couple denied marriage license in La.

Ilocano wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Masques wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

aimless wrote:

The Sheriff wrote:

aimless wrote:

The Sheriff wrote:

aimless wrote:

Board footer