Well, this white judge does. Or at least claiming to be thinking of the children instead of saying what he really feels. Basically Keith Bardwell has denied a marriage license to interracial couples, with this totally not racist defense:
"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."I think Liss at Shakesville sums it up best:
This judge has admitted he turns away interracial couples for the following totally not racist reason:
Did I just read, in the year two thousand and nine A.D., a white man saying that he has "piles" of black friends who he generously allows to use his bathroom instead of sending them out in the backyard like a dog? And that's his defense that he's not racist?! For the love of Maude.
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.Huh. Well, apparently denying marriage to an interracial couple is somehow supposed to prevent children to those people? Yeah, dude. Sometimes shit doesn't work that way.
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.
"There is a problem with both groups accepting a child from such a marriage," Bardwell said. "I think those children suffer and I won't help put them through it."
And what the hell is up with people having so much love and concern over potential children??? We have the anti-choice camp who's all about saving potential babies, i.e. exerting control over women's bodies (this same camp, of course, couldn't care less about those babies once they're born). And now we have Bardwell, who just cares so much for children that he can't stand helping interracial children exist at all by turning away interracial couples. That's seriously some fucked up logic.
So asking "What about the children?" is completely pointless. What about the children?
macon d points out that this is simply a way to deflect the real racist implications:
Yesterday's news from Louisiana -- about the denial of a marriage license to an interracial couple -- reminds me of a scenario that I've encountered several times in real life, and also many times in movies and TV shows (but I can't remember any particular example of the latter -- can you?).Oh, those poor biracial children. As Liss aptly points out, "Well, he's got a point there. I mean, last I checked, the furthest a biracial child could go in America was president."
A black and white couple want to get married, but the parents and others object. Especially the white parents. But of course, they won't admit to the racism that's motivating their objection. Maybe not even to themselves.
So instead of saying something like, "I just don't want you marrying someone who's black," they often say instead, "But, but . . . what about the children? They'll have so much trouble, feeling, you know, accepted and all."
I would also like to speculate for a moment: if Bardwell asks every couple if they're interracial before agreeing to issue a marriage license, and he's only turned away four interracial couples (heavy snark), why is a complaint only being made now? Didn't this question strike a fucking chord with any of the non-interracial couples? I mean, if I was calling to inquire about a marriage license and that question was the first thing out of the judge's mouth, the first thing out of mine would be "What the hell does that have to do with anything?" Or some colorful variation thereof. How is the race of the two people any of his damn business?? And why didn't anyone else call him out on this shit?
Post-racial my ass.