Interracial couple denied marriage license in Louisiana

[Locutus of Bored]

Some of the ignorance in this thread is simply mind boggling. I'm half black and while and my quality of life has never been anything other than normal. It had no effect of how I was treated in any way.

The fact that this judge made this call is nothing more than him expressing how he sees the world, a world he knows nothing about. So yes he is a racist fucktard and anyone who defends him in any way is just as racist!

Anyone here wanna tell me I shouldn't have married my wife and that our kids would never be accepted by society?! Go right ahead and step up! I fucking dare any racist piece of shit!

Dude, chill. Even Juan said the guy's decision was wrong, he's just not convinced on his motive for doing so. No one is defending this judge's actions, so the anger is misplaced.

 

[T J]

Perhaps you are right. Didn't mean to get overly hot about it. It is a touchy subject for me. Didn't mean anything personal to anyone here. Hopefully the next judge in that seat will have a better head in his or her shoulders.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

No worries. And I can certainly understand where your coming from and getting upset about it when such decisions hit close to home. Hell, it pissed me off too.

 

[JuanBolio]

It had no effect of how I was treated in any way.

I'm glad. You were most fortunate to have never found yourself under the power or at the mercy of someone who would hold your race against you. I'm really glad that kind of thing is starting to fade away.

So yes he is a racist fucktard and anyone who defends him in any way is just as racist!

A further example of just how casually and incorrectly such labels are thrown around. You are both incorrect in this assertion and very insulting.

Anyone here wanna tell me I shouldn't have married my wife and that our kids would never be accepted by society?! Go right ahead and step up! I fucking dare any racist piece of shit!

I don't think anyone here has stated such views. You shouldn't get so emotional and defensive about it.

It's obvious he has similar feelings and is just hiding behind his fake cloak of good intentions. That cloak masks his true feelings that whites and blacks shouldn't marry. That's the real reason he denied that marriage license.

That is pure speculation and supposition, inspired, I think, by a wide streak of paranoia regarding race relations in your character, particularly those between whites and non-whites. Other than the fact that racists have before hidden their true beliefs under such masks, there is no reason to think that of this man whatsoever. Quite frankly, you're pulling it out of your ass and shutting your eyes and your mind to the possibility of simply taking him at face value.

And this is probably a reach, but perhaps this man was angered by Barack Obama's election, because it showed that his attitude was wrong, and he probably can't bear that.

You're right, that's a big reach. But then again so is your supposition that he's a racist hiding his true motivations.

It's quite simple. He's a racist fool who is masking his true intentions. You've made a simple situation a convolulted one.

Actually, mine is the simpler explanation. I take his word at face value as I have no way of knowing his inner beliefs for certain. You, on the other hand, seem compelled to slap him with labels based on conjecture about his character inspired by your seeming paranoia regarding racism. You have no evidence to back up your claims whatsoever. Not one iota.

Edit:

Perhaps you are right. Didn't mean to get overly hot about it. It is a touchy subject for me. Didn't mean anything personal to anyone here. Hopefully the next judge in that seat will have a better head in his or her shoulders.

No worries, man. We all get a little hot sometimes. And I agree, hopefully the next Justice won't allow his personal beliefs interfere with his duties.

 

[MarianLH]

Again - its not racism unless it stems from racial hatred or ideas of superiority/inferiority.

That's wrong. 1, 2

I know that some people feel a spinal reflex urge to buck the trend, to dislike what's popular, to stand apart from the unwashed masses. But this is one area where not going with the flow doesn't make you edgy, or "not sheep".

Racism is racism, however it's dressed up, and regardless of whether it stems from malice or ignorance. Some hairs do not need to be split.


Marian

 

[Red Ranger]

Again - its not racism unless it stems from racial hatred or ideas of superiority/inferiority.

That's wrong. 1, 2

I know that some people feel a spinal reflex urge to buck the trend, to dislike what's popular, to stand apart from the unwashed masses. But this is one area where not going with the flow doesn't make you edgy, or "not sheep".

Racism is racism, however it's dressed up, and regardless of whether it stems from malice or ignorance. Some hairs do not need to be split.


Marian

Strong buy, Marian! Glad to see there are some people who have sense on this board, unlike our buddy "Juan" who enjoys being a contrarian just for, as you say, the sake of splitting hairs. -- RR

 

[JuanBolio]

Marian, thanks for your input. I disagree, and your assumptions about my motivations are quite incorrect. But thank you for playing.

As for you, Red Ranger, you're once again incorrect, as usual. I disagree because I think you and your ilk are wrong to assume this man in racist. I "split hairs" because my advanced and super-powerful mind is apparently capable of taking into account more variables than yours. This coupled with my lack of your seeming compulsion to judge, file people into neat little pigeonholes, and make grand and sweeping assumptions based of prejudice and paranoia led me to my conclusions.

I am not being contrarian for the sake of argument. I believe what I say just as much as you do. If you don't like it, that's too bad, but I won't lose any sleep over it. All my life I've had to deal with people who throw stubborn fits when I'm right and they're wrong. It ceased to phase me a long time ago.

If you want to keep debating this point, please feel free to keep posting. I'll go tit-for-tat with you on this matter til the sun collapses in on itself. No problem at all.

 

[Ward Fowler]

I think Juan Bolio has a point. I was reading the original article and I don't think the judge is racist. He says for instance:

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

Right in the quote he says he's not racist. Case closed. Now, I have to admit that although I know "piles and piles" of black people, I only have one close friend who is black but he's a very dear friend. When he enters my home I make it a point to tell him that he's allowed to use my bathroom. That's how I show him I'm not racist. I mean, if I'm going to let black people use my bathroom then at least I should get credit for "treating them like everyone else." Am I wrong?
So thanks for showing me the light Juan Bolio. You are a true hero of the downtrodden.

 

[Gepard]

^I was about to yell at you, but then I realized what you're doing.

Anyhow, "I just don't believe in mixing the races that way" is just about the worst thing someone could say when trying to sell us on a lack of racism. Since Juan is so convinced we should let the judge's words speak for themselves, let's just mediate on his statement for a little bit, shall we?

 

[JuanBolio]

None of that means he has racial hatred or ideas of superiority in his heart. All those ideas are still pure conjecture. You want to extrapolate a mountain out of a molehill? Be my guest. I'll sit here laughing at you and shaking my head.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

None of that means he has racial hatred or ideas of superiority in his heart. All those ideas are still pure conjecture. You want to extrapolate a mountain out of a molehill? Be my guest. I'll sit here laughing at you and shaking my head.

Of course not, he has black friends and he lets the good ones use his bathroom despite their black cooties getting everywhere. Not at all racist.

Oh, and, minor point, he doesn't believe in mixing the races, which of course has absolutely no basis in believing it dilutes the purity of the white race or any other such nonsense that couldn't possibly be linked to believing in the superiority of one arbitrary racial characteristic over another. How quaint.

With every debate I fluctuate between thinking you are either the most incredibly naive person on Earth or monumentally fucking with everyone in your quest to earn the title of Captain Contrary. Neither option carries much in the way of credibility though.

 

[JuanBolio]

None of that means he has racial hatred or ideas of superiority in his heart. All those ideas are still pure conjecture. You want to extrapolate a mountain out of a molehill? Be my guest. I'll sit here laughing at you and shaking my head.

Of course not, he has black friends and he lets the good ones use his bathroom despite their black cooties getting everywhere. Not at all racist.

Oh, and, minor point, he doesn't believe in mixing the races, which of course has absolutely no basis in believing it dilutes the purity of the white race or any other such nonsense that couldn't possibly be linked to believing in the superiority of one arbitrary racial characteristic over another. How quaint.

With every debate I fluctuate between thinking you are either the most incredibly naive person on Earth or monumentally fucking with everyone in your quest to earn the title of Captain Contrary. Neither option carries much in the way of credibility though.

I have repeatedly conceded that he MIGHT be a racist and simply hiding his true motivations, so your points don't amount to much. Ultimately, however, there is no direct evidence for this. Until I see some I'll take him at his word, since it is indeed possible for someone to think and act as he did and not be a racist - a point which few here seem able to accept.

I'm not fucking with anyone - everything I say, aside from occasional bouts of glaringly obvious sarcasm, is serious and reflects what I actually think. As for being naive, well, I don't deny that I am idealistic, but I do tend to take all available factors into account. I just tend to think a bit outside conventional boxes and don't always come to popular conclusions, if I come to any conclusions at all.

Think what you want about me. Drawing conclusions about people you know very little about doesn't seem to be a problem for you, or many others.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Think what you want about me. Drawing conclusions about people you know very little about doesn't seem to be a problem for you, or many others.

It's a medium where one can only draw conclusions about you and your stance on various issues based on what you say.

 

[JuanBolio]

Even so, why am I the subject here? This thread is about the actions and motivations of a person very far removed from me. If you want to get personal, why not take it to TNZ where the same topic is under discussion?

Is my stance on this and other controversial matters on which I didn't conform with the majority REALLY that offensive?

 

[John Picard]

Even so, why am I the subject here? This thread is about the actions and motivations of a person very far removed from me. If you want to get personal, why not take it to TNZ where the same topic is under discussion?

Is my stance on this and other controversial matters on which I didn't conform with the majority REALLY that offensive?

It's because you're wrong and want to argue semantics that aren't there. The bottom line is that we've all tried to explain it to you; however, we cannot understand it for you.

 

[JuanBolio]

Even so, why am I the subject here? This thread is about the actions and motivations of a person very far removed from me. If you want to get personal, why not take it to TNZ where the same topic is under discussion?

Is my stance on this and other controversial matters on which I didn't conform with the majority REALLY that offensive?

It's because you're wrong and want to argue semantics that aren't there. The bottom line is that we've all tried to explain it to you; however, we cannot understand it for you.

It has nothing to do with semantics whatsoever. Your position that Bardwell is a racist has no direct evidence in support of it and is based entirely on suppositions, stereotypes, and equating his words and actions with those of true racists on the basis of surface similarities.

You don't need to explain anything to me John Picard. I understand your position perfectly - apparently better than you do. You think he is a racist because he did something a racist might do, said things a racist might say (if he wanted to deny being a racist), and thus assume he is lying about his intentions while inventing a whole list of supposed "true" motivations to attribute to him.

I get it, I just don't go along with it. Your evidence is purely circumstantial and suppositional. Sure, he's a racist if you dismiss everything he said about his beliefs and motivations and invent your own. Anyone would be.

So tell me... what is it that you think I don't understand?

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Even so, why am I the subject here? This thread is about the actions and motivations of a person very far removed from me. If you want to get personal, why not take it to TNZ where the same topic is under discussion?

Is my stance on this and other controversial matters on which I didn't conform with the majority REALLY that offensive?

You made it about yourself and your supposedly superior standards for judging people over the rest of us pages ago.

You just smugly commented on laughing and shaking your head at the people who disagree with you in the post right before mine, so you can drop the innocence routine. You can't place yourself above everyone else and then expect people not to question your reasoning.

 

[John Picard]

Even so, why am I the subject here? This thread is about the actions and motivations of a person very far removed from me. If you want to get personal, why not take it to TNZ where the same topic is under discussion?

Is my stance on this and other controversial matters on which I didn't conform with the majority REALLY that offensive?

It's because you're wrong and want to argue semantics that aren't there. The bottom line is that we've all tried to explain it to you; however, we cannot understand it for you.

It has nothing to do with semantics whatsoever. Your position that Bardwell is a racist has no direct evidence in support of it and is based entirely on suppositions, stereotypes, and equating his words and actions with those of true racists on the basis of surface similarities.

You don't need to explain anything to me John Picard. I understand your position perfectly - apparently better than you do. You think he is a racist because he did something a racist might do, said things a racist might say (if he wanted to deny being a racist), and thus assume he is lying about his intentions while inventing a whole list of supposed "true" motivations to attribute to him.

I get it, I just don't go along with it. Your evidence is purely circumstantial and suppositional. Sure, he's a racist if you dismiss everything he said about his beliefs and motivations and invent your own. Anyone would be.

So tell me... what is it that you think I don't understand?

As has been pointed out several posts back, Juan, the Judge stated that he, "does not believe in mixing the races in this way" but then goes out of the way to state how he "has piles of black friends".

Face it: you're the lone voice of dissent in this entire discussion. And, as Locutus has pointed out, you're smug and believe you have superior reasoning abilities over all who disagree with you.

 

[JuanBolio]

Even so, why am I the subject here? This thread is about the actions and motivations of a person very far removed from me. If you want to get personal, why not take it to TNZ where the same topic is under discussion?

Is my stance on this and other controversial matters on which I didn't conform with the majority REALLY that offensive?

You made it about yourself and your supposedly superior standards for judging people over the rest of us pages ago.

You just smugly commented on laughing and shaking your head at the people who disagree with you in the post right before mine, so you can drop the innocence routine. You can't place yourself above everyone else and then expect people not to question your reasoning.

Question my reasoning all you like. I welcome it. Calling me naive and "Captain Contrary", though, is a blatant personal jab. As for my own comments - my laughing and shaking my head was at arguements and reasoning, not posters themselves. There are many posters I like and greatly respect whom I find myself at odds with in this and other debates - yourself included.

As has been pointed out several posts back, Juan, the Judge stated that he, "does not believe in mixing the races in this way" but then goes out of the way to state how he "has piles of black friends".

Right... and that proves what exactly?

Face it: you're the lone voice of dissent in this entire discussion.

Actually several people have agreed with my position on this topic in TNZ, but that hardly matters. Being the only guy with the right answer isn't anything new to me.

And, as Locutus has pointed out, you're smug and believe you have superior reasoning abilities over all who disagree with you.

Not so. There are plenty of people who disagree with me on various topics who can easily match my powers of reasoning. On this particular topic, though, I think those who disagree with me based on the lines of thought I outlined in my last post are coming to some very shaky conclusions based on suppositions.

You cannot deny that your entire case for this guy conclusively being a racist hinges on dismissing everything he's said as a lie and writing in your own version of his motivations.

 

[Ward Fowler]

None of that means he has racial hatred or ideas of superiority in his heart. All those ideas are still pure conjecture. You want to extrapolate a mountain out of a molehill? Be my guest. I'll sit here laughing at you and shaking my head.

I have no intention of wasting my time arguing with you so laugh all you'd like. I just wanted to point out how easy it was to show that your argument is intellectually and morally bankrupt. Please proceed with making a fool of yourself.