In my husband's lifetime...

[heidi]

Richard and Mildred Loving were married in 1958 in Washington D.C. because their home state of Virginia still upheld the antimiscegenation law which stated that interracial marriages were illegal. They were married, then lived together in Caroline County, Virginia. In 1959 they were prosecuted and convicted of violating the states's antimiscegenation law. They were each sentenced one year in jail, but promised the sentence would be suspended if they agreed to leave the state and not return for 25 years. Forced to move, they returned to Washington D.C. where, in 1963, they initiated a suit challenging the constitutionality of the antimiscegenation law. In March of 1966, the Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals upheld the law, but in June of 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled the law unconstitutional. Thus, in 1967 the 16 states which still had antimiscegenation laws on their books were forced to erase them.

Just some backstory which might be useful in thinking through what Massacheusetts did yesterday.

And the Supreme Court ruling about antimiscegenation happened within my husband's lifetime.

---

Within my own lifetime...

When my parents bought their first house, just after I was born, there were areas of Miami Beach that they couldn't purchase on, because of restrictive covenants that barred Jews. When the were able to move up to a nicer house about 8 years later - in 1979 - they could not purchase on two of the "private" islands (which sounds a lot ritzier than it is - this is Miami Beach, the city that is three miles wide and speckled with islands) - same restriction. And I remember being able to go play at a friend's house on one of those islands only because I didn't look Jewish, so it wouldn't be a problem.

And yes, all these restrictions are based on/linked to the concept that there is something immoral/wrong/heathen/bad about being Jewish. Aren't they, at the basest level?

And that's all probably going into the conclusions I've drawn over the past decade or so about gay rights issues - because I don't see the restrictions as any different than the ones that controlled where I could live when I was eight.

Comments

[ivyblossom.livejournal.com]

<3

[katrionaa.livejournal.com]

I was thinking about that this morning, how it used to be illegal to marry someone of a different race. How my father grew up going to segregated schools. And how clearly ridiculous and wrong those ideas are now, yet changing them took terrific fighting and effort.

[sundancekid.livejournal.com]

I was actually thinking about that, about the miscegenation laws, and about how much things have changed, and how far we still have to go. About how my mother, who was born in 1950, didn't go to school with anyone black until she was a senior in high school. About how my grandfather put in 20 years with the NYPD, but was stuck at a desk because he was Jewish. About how there's a gay prom for high school kids in Dallas (I went to it last year), and how it's great that it exists, and how it's sad that there's a need for it.

Thanks for a very thoughtful post.

[badonkatonks.livejournal.com]

I'm wondering if there will be many states refusing to honor the marriage laws of Massachusetts even though states are constitutionally obligated to honor the laws of other states...

Or let me rephrase that, how many states...

[ladylisse.livejournal.com]

Aside from making me feel really really young...yeesh. I was born after all of this, so I forget that most of the legislatures and the members of the courts saw this happen in their lifetimes. Which of course makes me wonder about people who talk about the 1950s being the good old days. :\

[mattador.livejournal.com]

Exactly.

[debellatrix.livejournal.com]

Amazing isn't it?

[sangerin.livejournal.com]

Definite food for thought.

Hope you don't mind that I'm linking to it from my LJ - if you do mind, tell me, and I will, of course, remove the link.

[heidi8.livejournal.com]

I just looked at your LJ and yes, of course it's fine! I'm flattered, actually.

[ciroccoj.livejournal.com]

Same here - I linked to it after reading about Bush declaring that "marriage was a sacred institution between a man and a woman and that the court's decision violated the principle." Hope that's OK with you - please let me know if it's not.

[heidi8.livejournal.com]

No problem. You also might enjoy this bit from today's NY Times:

In recent years, support for gay rights has sharply increased. A newly released poll found that although most Americans oppose gay marriage, views vary a lot by age. Older people oppose it 4 to 1, while young respondents are equally divided. That strongly suggests that eventually the views expressed by the Massachusetts court will be widely held. And Americans will come to regard this week's decision as they now do Loving v. Virginia — as a statement of the obvious.

[ciroccoj.livejournal.com]

Sorry to put a long comment here, but speaking of stats, these came up in a Canadian magazine in September, re. our possible legalization of same-sex marriages (they're already legal in Ontario, but the Federal Government is proposing making them legal by statute, not just precedent). I quoted them in an lj entry:

Apparently right now polls show we're pretty evenly divided, 49% for, 49% against, 2% watching The Anna Nicole show.

Opposition stats by province: BC 45%, Alberta 58%, Saskatchewan 61%, Manitoba 61% (and is anybody surprised at any of those numbers?), Ontario 52% (ARG!! I thought we were smarter than this!!), Quebec 38% (see, this is why I for one don't want them to separate: without them, we're just a bunch of ignorant rednecks in tuques), Maritimes 48% (see? Poor, but decent), Territories ?% (apparently it's too damn cold to take polls up there).

Some other interesting stats:

Most likely to oppose are men (54%), lacking high school diplomas (66%), earning less than $30,000 a year (55%), and aged 55 and up (63%).

Less likely to oppose are women (44%), university grads (36%), earning more than $60,000 (42%), and aged 18-34 (34%).

Also, Canadian Catholics are 50% for, 48% against. I guess some people took the "Do Unto Others" part of Sunday School to heart.

The age part gives me hope, too. Hope that someday the bulk of the yahoos will be dead and those left will realize that it's not an affront to All That Is Het to respect all persons who have chosen to make a lifelong commitment to another human being, regardless of their genders.