I'm sure people will try to make this about racism, but their opposition to interracial marriages is just a logical part of their opposition to couples that aren't blood related.

They better call Saul.

kbronsito: I'm sure people will try to make this about racism, but their opposition to interracial marriages is just a logical part of their opposition to couples that aren't blood related.

This thread is OVAAAAAAH

doglover: They better call Saul.

Oops. Wrong thread.

On the other hand I don't know any successful marriages that AREN'T interracial. So that's my 2 yen on the topic.

I have to admit that I support this position at least once a month - or however often my wife is mad at me because she's wrong about something and doesn't want to admit it.

doglover: doglover: They better call Saul.

Oops. Wrong thread.

On the other hand I don't know any successful marriages that AREN'T interracial. So that's my 2 yen on the topic.

But now you've got me wondering who Saul is and why anyone should call him.

To be fair, this is this congregation's decision. They don't want to perform these marriages, then that is up to them. Folks are just as free to not join this congregation, or find another church, and their ministry is just as free to cut these racist asshats off at the knees too.

Freedom of religion isn't about being free to do things that everyone agrees with. It is the freedom to do things that some folks think are dickish or wrong. Be that marrying gheys, be that not accepting folks of color, be that helping the poor, be that giving shelter to the downtrodden, be that opening up a soup kitchen and counseling for addicts. Someone out there thinks that all of these things are in the wrong, and that's the church and the ministry's decision to support them. We can't force them to come around to our way of thinking, not with any official action. Whether or not they'll stand the test of time, that's for the church or ministry to decide. A congregation of racist asshats? That's their right, and folks can argue with them, we can disagree with them, we can point out what we perceive to be their failings as individuals, but we can't use the government to force them to change.

Starving off at the vine and clutching at the withered fruit of a diminished congregation pent up and full of hate, that will do it well enough. That's what they want, that's freedom for you. It ain't always pretty, and it ain't always roses. Sometimes folks have to have the freedom to fail, and to provide a bad example...

Yeah, we clearly need to be rid of those oppressive Civil Rights laws, because they are clearly unnecessary.

A church of 40 adopts the policy based on a 15 person vote (9-6).

Thompson, who owns a hardware store, told the Herald-Leader on Tuesday that the proposal has been taken out of context, but declined further comment.

When it gets to the point where you feel strongly about something but can't explain why, it's hard to not conclude racism. We've seen it with Obama since the election.

"Obama's going to do this!"

"Um...actually, he just did the opposite."

"Well, he's still a terrible president."

"Why?"

"He just is."

They'll say don't call them racists, but they're unable to tell you why they aren't.

hubiestubert: To be fair, this is this congregation's decision. They don't want to perform these marriages, then that is up to them. Folks are just as free to not join this congregation, or find another church, and their ministry is just as free to cut these racist asshats off at the knees too.

Can't agree more.

thismomentinblackhistory: A church of 40 adopts the policy based on a 15 person vote (9-6).

[farm5.static.flickr.com image 320x480]

I have a more appropriate "meh," for you:

xanadian:
I have a more appropriate "meh," for you:

[i249.photobucket.com image 300x300]

HARK the herald angels sing!

The proposal also said "parties of such marriages will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services" or other church functions, with the exception of funerals.

Thompson, who owns a hardware store, told the Herald-Leader on Tuesday that the proposal has been taken out of context, but declined further comment.

Just curious what sort of context makes that not awful.

Quasar: The proposal also said "parties of such marriages will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services" or other church functions, with the exception of funerals.

Thompson, who owns a hardware store, told the Herald-Leader on Tuesday that the proposal has been taken out of context, but declined further comment.

Just curious what sort of context makes that not awful.

See, it's not the context of the statement that would make it not awful. It's the context of where the proposal was thought up.

So, while it may seem awful for every decent human being in America, at the Klan meeting, it's not awful at all.

xanadian: I have a more appropriate "meh," for you:

Haha did you make that?

We can't have blacks and whites getting together and producing tremendously hot-looking offspring!





Because that would be bad!

Okay, okay I get that they don't want any black on white action going on, but what if I'm married to a hot Asian chick?

CitizenTed: We can't have blacks and whites getting together and producing tremendously hot-looking offspring!

[img2.timeinc.net image 300x400]

[s11.allstarpics.net image 450x400]

Because that would be bad!

Yeah, you definitely want those recessive genes to be the ones that come out. Obviously, those are the good ones.

/actually no they aren't
//making sure to keep the pics with this post

The proposal also said "parties of such marriages will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services" or other church functions, with the exception of funerals.

He then went on to make the "wink, wink" motion.

/Gross

stpauler: The proposal also said "parties of such marriages will not be received as members, nor will they be used in worship services" or other church functions, with the exception of funerals.

"While we regret that we cannot attend the funeral, we would like to say that we whole heartedly approve of it..."

thismomentinblackhistory: xanadian: I have a more appropriate "meh," for you:

Haha did you make that?

No, I believe basemetal found it for me, IIRC...

They're not gone, but fading. I expect it will mainly tend to drive the few children from their church faster.

hubiestubert: Freedom of religion isn't about being free to do things that everyone agrees with. It is the freedom to do things that some folks think are dickish or wrong.

...to a point. Bob Jones U v. US, 461 U.S. 574 (1983) indicates some of the limits. The case and common law "public interest requirement" means that sufficiently dickish cases can risk loss of the usual religious tax exemption, or even outright prohibition. (For example, you can't perform human sacrifice or have temple prostitution, even under guise of religious freedom.) This is probably within those limits, as it does not impinge on government policy of compelling interest like racial equality in education. However, after reading the BJUvUS ruling, it looks like an IRS challenge over this wouldn't be immediately laughed out of court.

dnrtfa: the butthurt must be about some white girl going out with a black guy.
rtfa: yep.

/nothing to see here
//move along.
///where the white women at?!

Please...leave these people alone. They aren't bothering anyone but the couple who sang there and that couple has every right to leave and go worship someplace else. The internet has the effect of turning local stupidity into National outrage.

ElusiveWookiee: Diogenes: Thompson, who owns a hardware store, told the Herald-Leader on Tuesday that the proposal has been taken out of context, but declined further comment.

When it gets to the point where you feel strongly about something but can't explain why, it's hard to not conclude racism. We've seen it with Obama since the election.

"Obama's going to do this!"

"Um...actually, he just did the opposite."

"Well, he's still a terrible president."

"Why?"

"He just is."

They'll say don't call them racists, but they're unable to tell you why they aren't.


Remember folks....you're a racist until you can prove otherwise!

hey! I'm not a racist! I don't even segregate my clothing! Although, I bet I'm always missing socks because the dark ones keep stealing them...

This is way more attention than these bigots are worth. So much I dumb I want to point out, but they aren't worth it.

I'll just call them shiatcarls and move on.

ElusiveWookiee: Diogenes: Thompson, who owns a hardware store, told the Herald-Leader on Tuesday that the proposal has been taken out of context, but declined further comment.

When it gets to the point where you feel strongly about something but can't explain why, it's hard to not conclude racism. We've seen it with Obama since the election.

"Obama's going to do this!"

"Um...actually, he just did the opposite."

"Well, he's still a terrible president."

"Why?"

"He just is."

They'll say don't call them racists, but they're unable to tell you why they aren't.


Remember folks....you're a racist until you can prove otherwise!

If it walks like a duck...

Kit Fister: hey! I'm not a racist! I don't even segregate my clothing! Although, I bet I'm always missing socks because the dark ones keep stealing them...

Have to remember this the next time a "why socks disappear" conversation comes up...

ElusiveWookiee: Diogenes: Thompson, who owns a hardware store, told the Herald-Leader on Tuesday that the proposal has been taken out of context, but declined further comment.

When it gets to the point where you feel strongly about something but can't explain why, it's hard to not conclude racism. We've seen it with Obama since the election.

"Obama's going to do this!"

"Um...actually, he just did the opposite."

"Well, he's still a terrible president."

"Why?"

"He just is."

They'll say don't call them racists, but they're unable to tell you why they aren't.


Remember folks....you're a racist until you can prove otherwise!

Don't be simplistic. That's not what I said at all.

What I said is that if you discriminate against people of a particular race, but have no logical explanation why, you're probably a racist. It's not assumed "racist until proved otherwise." It's "making racial judgments for no conceivable reason."

Why do you think this church is discriminating against interracial couples? Just for kicks?