Louisiana Justice Of The Peace Denies Interracial Couple Marriage License
Keith Bardwell, Justice of the Peace in Tangipahoa Parish, has refused to issue a marriage license to Beth Humphrey and Terrence McKay because he says these marriages don’t last long and he’s concerned for any potential children they may have.
“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.”
Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.
The couple says they’ll consult with the US Department of Justice about filing a discrimination suit. If these marriages were not permitted, one has to wonder who would be president of the United States right now.
“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.”
They use my bathroom?
Wow, he ain’t no racist, that’s fo sho.
Wasn’t there a Supreme Court decision called Loving v. Virginia about 40 years ago?
crh3e Reply:
October 15th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
right on jasperjava, this guy ain’t a racist, but he’s a lawbreaker. I believe that SCOTUS decision was in 1963.
crh3e Reply:
October 15th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
sorry ‘63 was when the ACLU filed a motion on the behalf of the Lovings, which paved the way for the SCOTUS trial. The decision was reached in ‘67.
jazmine Reply:
October 15th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
The bathroom part is a real killer all right. Good Gawd!
It’s interesting to note how he equates his pile of black friends, with his bathroom?
Piles= Hemorrhoids
Sluice Reply:
October 15th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
Yes, this is unconstitutional. I’m not sure the legal mechanism involved but I imagine this guy is going to lose his power of attorney if he doesn’t reverse his decision.
October 15th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Halle Berry, the perfect woman and the result of an interracial marriage.
Enough said.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:40 am
“Halle Berry, the perfect woman”
Pfft, Jada Pinkett is better looking, and I don’t even know if she’s from a mixed marriage.
average james Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Halle Berry……….is so hot.
Jada Pinkett is no slouch either, so hot.
October 15th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
You gotta be kidding me! This guy really irritates me. I’ll stop there before I get too upset.
average james Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Bob Jones university-South Carolina
October 15th, 2009 at 10:46 pm
I guess this justice of the [piece] can’t buy a football team, eh?
EricG Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:03 am
Damn straight.
Bigots go home.
October 16th, 2009 at 12:14 am
Now, you know how gay people feel when they say “Oh, we have nothing against gays except that they can’t marry or “Some of my best friends are gay” or “You can have some rights if you’re good little gays and lesbians. Well, guess what? THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A “HALF A BIGOT”!
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:37 am
“except that they can’t marry”
That’s what annoys me…gays can marry. Nothing forbids you, Gay Rob, from marrying a woman. NOTHING. Equal rights.
Oh, you want to redefine marriage as YOU see fit to fit YOUR lifestyle? Well, I want 10 wives…that fits my lifestyle. K?
michael Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:39 am
Flap,
How would you feel if the societal norm was for men to marry men, but you were attracted to women? You would have equal rights to marry another man. Why should marriage be redefined to conform to your lifestyle?
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:47 am
“Why should marriage be redefined to conform to your lifestyle?”
What are we basing this stuff on? Why create a hypothetical scenario? Marriage as it is defined now has tradition and religion on its side. Why should it change? Because a bunch of people suddenly don’t like it? Why is it called “equal rights” when a man can marry a man or a woman can marry a woman? That’s YOUR liberal idea of equal rights.
Michael, can I marry my sister? Why not? Don’t impose your morality on me. How about my daughter or son if she/he consents? What if I “feel” attracted to children? Oh, but that’s different…right? Why should it be? Why make 18 the age of consent? Isn’t it unfair for society to deny those NAMBLA members the “right” to marry children?
michael Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:59 am
flap,
There is a clear difference between two unrelated consenting adults of the same sex agreeing to enter into a marriage contract and somebody wanting to marry their child. You know that. That’s why homosexual behavior is legal and pedophilia is not. All gays want is the same right to enter into a legal marriage contract with their partner, the same way that parters of the opposite sex do. Whether or not religious institutions want to recognize gay marriages is their own business, but from a purely legal standpoint, a gay couple should have the right to go before a justice of the peace and obtain a marriage contract.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
“purely legal standpoint”
That’s your opinion, though, whether two consenting adults should be recognized as a marriage.
Why does the marriage contract necessarily have to be between two consenting adults? Because the case could be made that a group marriage should be allowed between 10 consenting adults. Right? From a purely legal standpoint, why should it be limited to only 1 and 1?
Should pedophilia be illegal if the child is consenting? The age of consent shouldn’t necessarily be 18, should it?
I guess one point I’m trying to make is that people in favor of gay marriage want to cleanly change the definition from “man and woman” to “two consenting adults.” If you change the definition, it can logically and perhaps legally should extend to any consenting individuals, including children, relatives, and polygamous relationships. Just because there’s a “ick” factor for pedophilia, incestual, and polygamous relationships shouldn’t be the litmus test, since some people use “ick” as a factor in being against gay marriage.
fede Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 2:42 am
“gays can marry”
I just love it when this statement is abused. Gays CANNOT marry the person they love in most of these United States.
Your illusion of what equal rights means is clouding your judgement. Equal rights was meant for everybody, not just for you or a small group who want to decide for others what’s socially acceptable.
“Michael, can I marry my sister? Why not? Don’t impose your morality on me. How about my daughter or son if she/he consents? What if I “feel” attracted to children? Oh, but that’s different…right? Why should it be? Why make 18 the age of consent? Isn’t it unfair for society to deny those NAMBLA members the “right” to marry children?”
“What are we basing this stuff on? Why create a hypothetical scenario? Marriage as it is defined now has tradition and religion on its side. Why should it change?”
You have used a hypothetical scenario, why is it only good for you? As all your scenarios are against the law, they cannot be used in the argument on the law side, as it is not illegal to be gay.
When will all the religiion resisters finally figure out that we do not and should not pass laws that conform to any religion? If you want to start passing laws that conform to religious beliefs, be prepared to follow all the religions, not just your own, that would be equal rights as well.
October 16th, 2009 at 12:15 am
By this same logic he could deny all young couples and around half of the older couples from getting married because statistically speaking they are likely to get a divorce anyway and would likely have at least one child in the time between now and then.
This is just the latest way to be a bigot and a racist.
You wrap it up in a neat little bow and explain how you love all the people you want to repress and discriminate against.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:35 am
“This is just the latest way to be a bigot and a racist.”
No, it’s the latest way for leftists to whip out the race card. Why is this guy an automatic bigot?
If ANY of you libs think it is easier for a mixed-race child to grow up in this racially-charged society (often fueled by libs), then you’re lying or just morons.
This guy had good intentions, but a bad result. Doesn’t mean he’s a racist. Kinda like libs have good intentions whenever an issue involves slaughtering the unborn…you know, to protect “women’s rights.”
michael Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:41 am
Wow, flap. This has got to be the stupidest thing you’ve ever said. I don’t feel like I can call you a bigot because I know from your posts that’s not how you are, but this is an awfully bigoted sounding post, I’m sorry.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:57 am
“I don’t feel like I can call you a bigot”
Oh, how magnanimous of you, Michael! Thanks so much!
What is stupid about what I said? Absolutely nothing. A mixed race child has a more difficult life. But, as I said, “BAD RESULT.” Read it again. “BAD RESULT.”
That means I DISAGREE with what this guy did. See that? DISAGREE. Funny how you missed that and do what a lot of libs tend to do and start branding people. (My own brother is in a racially mixed marriage, by the way. I’m glad you didn’t call me a bigot or I’d have to tell him that I’m a bigot…might be trouble in the family.) Congrats!
michael Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 2:01 am
I’m sorry, but my knee jerk reaction was that I couldn’t believe that you were in any way defending this guy as a man with “good intentions.” In other words, even though I knew you disagreed, I just couldn’t believe you were being so charitable to somebody who is clearly a bigot.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
“clearly a bigot”
How do you know? What if he truly believes that a mixed-race child will have a difficult time in life (which is probably true)?
It’s none of his business granted, and he very well could be a bigot, but this stance shouldn’t brand him a bigot.
If a black person expressed problems with a white person marrying his/her son or daughter, would he/she be bigoted? Not in my mind.
fede Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 2:02 am
This man is a bigot for not following the law and trying to push his opinions on others. His occupation requires him to issue marriage licenses to those who qualify, not to pass judgement on who should be allowed to marry and for what reasons. This sentence here says it all-“I’m not a racist. I just don’t believe in mixing the races that way.”
There are no “good intentions” here. If he has problems with certain people marrying, he should find another job. Does he stop people from marrying when he knows they’re alcoholics, or drug addicts, or can’t control their tempers, or if they’re poor? Would these marriages have an effect on a childs life? Would all these pass the good intentions? His job is to issue the license and not pass judgement.
Nobody said it’s easier for mixed children. Their lives are no better or worse as such. Childrens lives are dependent upon the quality of life they recieve at home, not the color of their skin. My children have had no problems growing up. And thanks for the christian attitude, I’m neither a liar or a moron.
TDro319 Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
“Kinda like libs have good intentions whenever an issue involves slaughtering the unborn…you know, to protect ‘women’s rights.’”
Yeah, and kinda like the cons cheering for the slaughter of post-born children in an unnecessary war. You know, to protect Bush and Cheney’s profits.
average james Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
and torture.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
“Yeah”
TDro admitted I’m right!
TDro319 Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
“TDro admitted I’m right!”
BTW, why didn’t ole Georgie overturn Roe v. Wade if he was so against abortion? He had eight years to do it. He may have been more interested in killing post born babies.
flap Reply:
October 17th, 2009 at 7:01 am
“why didn’t ole Georgie overturn Roe v. Wade”
For the same reason ole Barackie can’t implement a single payer system. Not politically feasible.
“He may have been more interested in killing post born babies.”
However misguided the Iraq War was, do you honestly think that was his goal? See, abortion actually targets a child…that’s the whole point of the procedure. War is about defense. You admitted WWII was necessary, and a lot of children died. So some wars are necessary, right? I don’t like death of innocents…that’s why I’m against abortion. But one of the main roles of government is to protect. It is to fight certain wars. Barack Obama apparently agrees.
October 16th, 2009 at 1:03 am
“I just don’t believe in mixing the races like that…”
Tough crap, your honor (I use that term loosely). It doesn’t matter what you believe. Your job is to follow the law and do your civic duty, not impose your personal beliefs on the citizens you serve. If this guy isn’t impeached, it will be an outrage.
libpatriot Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:11 am
Come to think of it, Michael, Bardwell is being an ACTIVIST JUDGE, now isn’t he?
:-0
average james Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Bullseye Lib !!
October 16th, 2009 at 1:04 am
“Bardwell said he asks everyone who calls about marriage if they are a mixed race couple. If they are, he does not marry them, he said.”
I wonder, is this just the black/white couples or is he a bigot to all other mixed race couples?
“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.”
How white of you. That’s the true sign of not being a racist, when you actually allow the black folk to utilize the bathroom. Is it the one in the front of the house or the one in the back? You know you’re racist when you have to claim you have black friends.
This attitude really makes my stomach churn. Being a white woman, married to a black man, I find this repulsive. What nerve to assume my children would have less of a life, or have more problems just because of their genes and the pigment of their skin. I have been married 24 yrs., longer than many friends I have, and my children are all well-adjusted and happy.
You sound like my father. He went to his grave never knowing my husband or my children. Grow up, we are all mixed, no body is “pure” anything. Except maybe pure bigot.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
“and my children are all well-adjusted and happy”
Anecdotal. I’m not defending this guy’s actions, but people are so quick to label others as racists, bigots, and homophobes.
This guy was misguided, but although it’s very presumptuous of him (as well as none of his business), isn’t it true that mixed-race children have it more difficult? Could not Barack Obama himself probably testify to that?
placefield Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
I don’t know, I am mixed race (German, Danish, English, Irish, etc) and seem to have had a pretty normal childhood.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Well, the irony in this is that because of the black-white racially charged country that it’s often that mix that may cause problems for the children. My brother married an Asian, and she’s fantastic. If you commit and love a person, does it really matter the race? I think that mix, though, has a little easier time fitting in. If my brother had married a black gal, I wouldn’t have cared. If they love each other, what do I care?
Being cognizant of potential difficulties the kids may have is logical and unselfish, though. Like, for instance, if you knew there was a 50% chance that your child would have a debilitating, whole-life affecting disease, would you selfishly have a child? Or, relating to this case, “oh, I’m not a racist, I love this black gal and I don’t give a crap what struggles my kids have to go through.” Fair enough, but you may be making it harder on your kids. If love is enough to conquer/ignore/overlook that potential problem, fine.
On the other hand, our society is changing and mixing more so it’s probably becoming a moot point as to the struggles of a mixed black-white child. So, YES, this guy was nosy, stupid, and misguided. Doesn’t make him an automatic bigot.
placefield Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
I agree with the point that as our society becomes more accepting, the potential difficulty that could arise from a child being of “mixed” race are diminishing. I am surrounded (friend, family, neighbors) by kids from just about every mix imaginable and with the exception of the occasional ignorant jerk, no one bats an eye. It is for the most part a non-issue. For my parents generation that would not have been the case.
crh3e Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
ok why are we worried about children of interracial marriages when the gen population divorce rate is over 50% (really 60%+ if you factor in legal separations). This is a cope-out excuse for a law-breaker.
placefield Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Agreed
fede Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
“and my children are all well-adjusted and happy”-me
“Anecdotal”-flap
While my life and my childrens lives are not a scientific experiment, they are hardly “anecdotal”. Their lives have been well documented, by ME. There are plenty of mixed race children who live normal and healthy lives without any difficulties. Neither color, race, nor ethnicity are the deciding factor of what kind of life a child will have, it’s the quality of life at home and the way he/she is brought up to respect themselves and others.
“Like, for instance, if you knew there was a 50% chance that your child would have a debilitating, whole-life affecting disease, would you selfishly have a child?”
Having a “debilitating, whole-life affecting disease”? So this is your comparison to a child of mixed race? Sorry to disappoint you but neither of my children or any other mixed children that I know have a disease or are a disease. There is no comparison here.
“Granted, this guy may very well be anti-Black and bigoted. But just because he violates peoples’ rights or does something stupid that involves a black person doesn’t make him a racist or bigoted.”
This statement in of itself is ludicrous, but I’ll take the bait.
bigot n.-a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race
Since he will not marry people of mixed race, he says it himself, “I don’t BELIEVE in mixing the races that way.” THAT makes him a bigot. Understand?
fede Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
By the way….this question here..
“Could not Barack Obama himself probably testify to that?”
Most of the President’s difficulties had more to do with the fact of him not coming to terms with why his father left, being carted around the world in new and strange places, having an acoholic step-parent and finally being deserted by his mother only to go live with grandparents who most likely were trying to come to terms with their own ideas of the “scary black man”. To just simply say his difficulties were the result of a mixed marriage is quite frankly, misleading.
flap Reply:
October 17th, 2009 at 7:05 am
“who most likely were trying to come to terms with their own ideas of the “scary black man”.”
This is really proving my point, Fede. You can talk about the irrationality of certain things but it still speaks to the potential difficulties a child may go through.
October 16th, 2009 at 1:38 am
“This guy had good intentions, but a bad result. Doesn’t mean he’s a racist.”
You might have an argument, except no one believes you, and no one with a brain believes this guy’s half-assed explanation, because we’ve been hearing BS cover stories like this from the Klan and from skinheads for decades.
And, let’s face the facts, this is about some gap-toothed bubba from the deep south violating people’s civil rights.
Racist till proven otherwise.
“Marriage as it is defined now has tradition and religion on its side. Why should it change?”
So your argument is it’s always been a certain way and that’s how you like it. And like all radical rightwing extremists you live in the past. Well sorry but the “definition” of marriage is irrelevant. And the legal entity is going to change whether you like it or not.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
“we’ve been hearing BS cover stories like this”
Granted, this guy may very well be anti-Black and bigoted. But just because he violates peoples’ rights or does something stupid that involves a black person doesn’t make him a racist or bigoted.
“radical rightwing extremists”
If you think I’M radical then it shows how out of touch and radical YOU are.
“So your argument is it’s always been a certain way and that’s how you like it.”
Stare decisis? But what is your argument? Arbitrarily changing the defintion from “man and woman” to “two consenting adults”? Why not 10 consenting adults? Why not children that can consent? Why not brothers and sisters that consent? Legally, the case could easily be made in that direction.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
“But just because he violates peoples’ rights or does something stupid that involves a black person doesn’t make him a racist or bigoted.”
The guy is a racist and apparently you can’t do simple addition, or you just don’t want to see the obvious truth.
“Stare decisis?”
That doesn’t mean “engraved in stone.”
“But what is your argument? Arbitrarily changing the defintion from “man and woman” to “two consenting adults”?”
It was never “defined.” It was merely assumed. And what it says in your bible doesn’t mean a damn thing when it comes to defining people’s status under the law. And you can take the slippery slope argument and stick it up Limbowel’s butthole.
October 16th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Blacks and whites are not Biblically supposed to marry and reproduce. What ever happened to the white race?
Whites are letting blacks take over the world; and we are financally supporting them.
OldLefty Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 10:31 am
This is when I don’t know if this is for real, or satire.
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 11:12 am
I would vote “troll.”
Either a standard internet troll or the type with an IQ of 17. Under the latter of course I include skinheads and whiteconeheads and all the rest of their southern brethren.
jasperjava Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Maybe just trolling for reactions, but possibly a real-life ignorant gap-toothed knuckle-dragging mouth-breathing neanderthal redneck.
I have actually read the Bible, and it doesn’t say anything about the “white race” or even about “black” people. There are a LOT of mixed marriages. The Jewish queen Esther marrying the Persian King, for just one example. There are many marriages across religions, races, and nationalities. There is NOTHING in the Bible that prohibits marriage across racial lines.
As for Blacks taking over the world, why should anyone have a problem with that? But I don’t see a lot of Black faces in the boardrooms, the real centers of power.
average james Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
Moses married an Ethiopian woman.
Numbers-chapter 12.
The penalty for Miriam speaking against Moses’ marriage was instant leprosy.
BarryB Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 1:10 pm
I am glad that I took the time to read!. I agree that this has got to be an idiotic troll.
average james: Nice Bible quote. :) I was going to dive in but you summed it up, perfectly.
flap Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
“real-life ignorant gap-toothed knuckle-dragging mouth-breathing neanderthal redneck”
Hmmm, lot of vitriol there…ignorance deserves vitriol?
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Ignorance is an excuse?
jasperjava Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Ignorance is a moral failure. There is no excuse for it except laziness. Ignorance is something that needs to be confronted and shamed. It’s a drag on society. If it wasn’t for ignorant people, George W. B*sh would never have become “president”. Think of the thousands of people who would be alive today if only a handful of Floridians had had better education.
flap Reply:
October 17th, 2009 at 7:18 am
“Ignorance is a moral failure.”
Morals based on what?
“If it wasn’t for ignorant people, George W. B*sh would never have become “president”.”
Same goes for Barack Ob*ma. This hope and change crap that was repeated ad nauseam has really done a lot of good for the country, right?
October 16th, 2009 at 10:29 am
I guess the fact that our President is a mixed race person is completely lost on this “nonracist” moron.
October 16th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Now that I think of it, I don’t recall a black person ever using my bathroom. All this time and I never knew I was racist. wow
Rocky the Liberal Rottweiler Reply:
October 16th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
A lot of racists don’t see what racists they are.
October 16th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
THIS MAN NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM JUSTICE OF THE PEACE STATUS. HOW ABOUT THIS MR KNOW IT ALL, LETS REVOLKED YOUR MARRIAGE LICENSE BECAUSE YOU MARRIED A WHITE PERSON LIKE YOURSELF INSTEAD OF HAVING AN INTERRATIAL MARRIAGE. DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU TOO” YOU BIG BIGOT!!!
RACISIM IN IT WORST FORM !!!!!! KNOW ANY KKK MEMBERS?
October 19th, 2009 at 2:48 pm