U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Was it right for the Supreme Court to strike down laws against interracial marriage?
Yes, it's good that they struck the laws down 91 78.45%
No, they should have left the states decide for themselves 23 19.83%
Not sure 2 1.72%
Voters: 116. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Old 06-17-2011, 12:19 AM
 
Location: Palm Springs, CA
26,535 posts, read 25,448,442 times
Reputation: 7745

Advertisements

The U.S. Supreme Court essentially legalized interracial marriage across the country in 1967, but a majority of Americans didn't approve of it until the 1990s. Since the majority opposed it, should it have remained illegal until then?

Most Americans Approve of Interracial Marriages
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-17-2011, 12:25 AM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,182 posts, read 21,193,630 times
Reputation: 8348
It's pure Racism and always was. As a US soldier I had to live on base because my wife was asian.
Why should the Government enforce someone else's beliefs
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 12:34 AM
 
Location: Palm Springs, CA
26,535 posts, read 25,448,442 times
Reputation: 7745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
Why should the Government enforce someone else's beliefs
Obviously, lots of people believe strongly that the government should be involved in marriage. Witness the fervor in which they want the government to not only ban same-sex marriage, but to have a federal amendment to the Constitution to prevent it.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 12:37 AM
 
Location: Southeast
4,296 posts, read 6,353,546 times
Reputation: 1445
Most Americans voted for Al Gore.

That does not mean we follow the will of the majority, which turned out to be for the better in both cases.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 03:12 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
8,141 posts, read 4,877,950 times
Reputation: 2903
I always find these kings of polls to be humerous and the level of hypocrisy generally becomes clear and evident. The people who sit around quoting polls and approval numbers all day long, as if our legislators should always vote along those "popular" lines. Then you have people who pretend that even the constitution itself is meaningless and should be ignored or reinterpreted along the lines of what the ruling majority want(healthcare, social security, civil rights, etc), who will come in here in these polls talking about constitutionality this or freedom that, as if they really care about the constitution(other than when it suits them).

The truth is, politics are nothing but a game that both sides play against each other to get elected. They really don't care that much about you or me or the constitution. Both parties ignore the constitution or attempt to interpret it any way they see fit for their own benefit. It is really pathetic that we play this game, but Americans love it, its a massively expensive spectactle every 4 years, even the rest of the world gets involved(especially with this new corporate personhood thing).


As for my opinion about interracial marriage. I just want to say that having multiple races on earth serves absolutely no purpose or benefit to humanity. The existence of multiple races is harmful and distracting to any actual advancement of human civilization and equality. This is something that is incurable until there is actual equality, which can only come from mixing and interracial mixing until all the people of Earth are roughly the same overall race, which goes against any concept of any actual benefit of diversity(there is no actual functional benefit to diversity, none).
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 05:50 AM
 
Location: St. Joseph Area
6,235 posts, read 8,578,606 times
Reputation: 3107
human rights for minorities should not be put up to a public vote. That's called the "tyranny of the Majority" and Madison had some choice words to say about it.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 07:49 AM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,182 posts, read 21,193,630 times
Reputation: 8348
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
Obviously, lots of people believe strongly that the government should be involved in marriage. Witness the fervor in which they want the government to not only ban same-sex marriage, but to have a federal amendment to the Constitution to prevent it.
That doesn't change it. The same hypocrites that want small government want to become the Taliban and enforce their own moral code
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 07:54 AM
 
Location: Neither here nor there
14,810 posts, read 14,257,628 times
Reputation: 32951
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
The U.S. Supreme Court essentially legalized interracial marriage across the country in 1967, but a majority of Americans didn't approve of it until the 1990s. Since the majority opposed it, should it have remained illegal until then?

Most Americans Approve of Interracial Marriages
I see a follow-up gay marriage thread in the background.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 07:58 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,791,002 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
The U.S. Supreme Court essentially legalized interracial marriage across the country in 1967, but a majority of Americans didn't approve of it until the 1990s. Since the majority opposed it, should it have remained illegal until then?

Most Americans Approve of Interracial Marriages
Since skin color is not something you can choose, and it is not a moral issue, I don't know why it would be illegal. It certainly doesn't harm anyone else so it's not against the greater good of society.

Having said that, the founding fathers did believe that the states should be able to determine stuff like that. I'm not saying any state would have been right to do so, but they were supposed to be able to legislate for themselves. I just don't think they believed marriage to be a federal issue.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2011, 07:58 AM
 
10,452 posts, read 10,859,318 times
Reputation: 12543
Even though people don't oppose interracial marriage these days like they used to, they do have a hard time wrapping their head around the idea. I can't tell you how many people thought my wife was working for me.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top