Remembering Mildred Loving
By bluegal Tuesday May 06, 2008 3:10pm
Campaign for America's Future:
Mildred Loving was a black woman who married a white man in Virginia, which was against the law in the state. She took her case all the way up to the Supreme Court, which struck down interracial marriage bans in the 1967 Loving v. Virginia decision. [..]It was announced (this week) that she has died at the age of 68. But what her AP obituary doesn't mention—hopefully others will correct the oversight—is that last year Mildred Loving came out foursquare for marriage equality for same-sex couples as well, and insisted you should, too.
Login or Register to post comments.
What an appropriate surname.
And to think that now, only 40 years later, there's a better than even chance that the son of a bi-racial marriage is about to call the White House home. I guess hindsight shows Virginia, and the rest of the country, that Mildred Loving's fight was indeed the good fight.
Agree with both of the above.
Homosexual marriage has replaced bi-racial marriage as the next great threat to humanity for the xenophobes and bigots of the world.
They were wrong then, they're wrong now...they will always be wrong in their denial of equal rights for all.
Lucky for her she didn't get today's Supreme Court.
This country has the blood of many GLBTIQ people on its hands, especially those of us who are Christian. I cannot believe that we use the Bible to condemn something like same-sex marriage, when we don't equally condemn shellfish or pork. And to use the Bible to criticize interracial marriage was stupid, and unchristian. "Race" is a modern, European concept and not applicable to the Bible or the Quran or the Vedas or the Avestas or the Tripitaka. Same with our definition and practice of homophilia.
So much innocent blood on the hands of fascist bigots wearing the guise of Catholics, or Baptists, or Sunni, or Shia, or Zoroastrian, or even Buddhists. One day the "Christians" who murdered others who had the wrong skin color or the wrong sexual orientation will answer to Yahweh for it. This Christian says may racists and homophobes burn in Hell....
I remember hearing this story on NPR and was astonished that they too didn't make the connection between interracial marriage and same sex marriage. Were they holding back or did they just miss that common thread between "state constitutions banning interracial marriage" and "state constitutions banning same-sex marriage"? I'm glad I wasn't the only one left wondering WTF?
Super J.
Another great American.
Super Jesus @ 6:
I think their is another deeper connection. The South used to be a Democratic Stronghold. The people pushing separate but equal were known as the "Southern Democrats"; I think I have also heard them called the "Dixie Democrats"; anyways, these democrats all jumped ship to the GOP, during the 1980s. Now the South is a known as "Red Country". The point I am trying to make is this. The anti-gay wing of the Republican party are the children of the people that pushed segregation. They go to the exact same churches and live in the exact same communities. They have just scratched out the word "colored or black" and replaced it with the word "homosexual". Now, I am going to take this one step further. The lost on the hate black issue; they are losing on the hate homosexuals issue; now they are switching to hating immigrants.
I Like Pie @ 8:
There's a sizable chunk of the population that's not comfortable without a bugaboo. First it was Indians, then slaves, then blacks under Jim Crow, then Communists and Chinese, then Russians, then Chinese again.
Frankly, I'm a lot more concerned about John McCain's desire to poke the Russian bear. Is he trying to piss off the Dynamic Duo ruling Russia enough to start WWIII?
Sluggirl @ 1:
Yes, I've always delighted in the title of this landmark case: Loving v. Virginia.
It was the state against loving. All too appropriate.
I do wish, however, that the case were decided on the basis of liberty instead of equal protection.
As for marriage in general, why exactly should the state be involved in anything but enforcing contracts as agreed to by the parties? If people want to have a contractual living arrangement, fine. The state should not invalidate such contracts because it disapproves of the sex, gender or number of people involved.
Two very brave people , all it took was love .
Karen @ 10:
My fave is the classic free-speech case, Iwannashoutfireinatheater v. U.S.
From Wikipedia:
On June 12, 2007, Mildred Loving issued a public statement for the 40th anniversary of the Loving v. Virginia decision of the US Supreme Court, which commented on same-sex marriage. [4] Her statement concluded:
“ Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.”
There's still laws on the books against unmarried people living together.
Good old ACLU. They have defended freedom more than any private militia has ever done.
Marriage "License"
Lets all burn ours and say we don't need no stinking licenses.
Cthulu @ 15:
A good counter to the ridiculous bumper sticker "If you love your freedom, thank a vet." would be "If you love your freedom, thank a civil liberties lawyer."
L.A. Confidential @ 16:
I mean what are we cattle or something that needs to licensed?
If "Loving" you is wrong, I don't wanna' be "white."
This is precisely what Evan Wolfson and the good people at Freedom to Marry have been arguing for some time now.
This is the civil rights issue of our generation, friends.
Prior to Loving v. Virginia in 1967, and up until he was about 6 years old, had Barack Obama's parents lived in any one of 17 US states they could have been arrested for "illegal co-habitation."
His Presidency will be a good start towards finally ending all this nonsense.
~Nyc
RIP dear lady, you were and are an inspiration to all
State should keep out of marriage anyway. Adults should be allowed to have personal contracts with adults. If you get outraged over someone else's contract, or use of the word "marriage" to define their relationship, to the point you feel armed thugs busting down bedroom doors are needed, that is sad.
So, let me guess this is not about marriage but it's a War on Family's or something is that the wing nut perspective?
They want to destroy families or something?
Sheesh what a mad house
Brad @ 23:
Hear, hear!
The state shouldn't be involved in marriage licenses, period. It shouldn't be allowed to define the kinds of private relationships it will sanction for us.
We can have contractual relationships regarding our estates. With whom we share them is none of the state's business, except to enforce the contractual rights of the parties involved.
1967? It's around the time of Sen. Obama's birth.
Damn I thought this was settled in the 40s.
Rest in Peace Mildred Loving.
RIP, so young.
pete @ 27:
Hold on there now maybe she can re manifest and help us out of this mass hallucination.
tHeAHusseinSavedMyLifeGaMeOfLiFe @ 28:
I don't know. I expect she's an old soul who's been around the cosmic block many times.
tHeAHusseinSavedMyLifeGaMeOfLiFe @ 26:
Scary, isn't it?
Constitutionally protected women's suffrage -- 1920
Voting Rights Act to enforce the 15th Amendment -- 1965
Constitutionally protected right to contraception -- 1965
Constitutionally protected interracial marriage -- 1967
Constitutionally protected right to terminate pregnancy -- 1972
Constitutionally protected right to sodomy -- 2003
Constitutionally protected right to the pursuit of happiness -- ????
tHeAHusseinSavedMyLifeGaMeOfLiFe @ 26:
Oh hell no human beings have been killing each other off since day one. Another million years and maybe human consciousness will have evolved enough to see killing is totally meaningless.
chuckn @ 2:
Not so fast there, Cowboy.
While Barack may be doing well, the Great State of Virginia looks like it's taken one step forward and at least 2 steps back:
2006, Virginia Voters Vote To Amend the State Constitution to Ban Same-Sex Marriage
It's not just gay marriage this Constitutional amendment covers but contracts between any couples.
Still got a long way to go in Virginia, Slim.
~Nyc
Damn, that guy next to her in the picture looks like his dog just died.
beltman713 @ 34:
Wouldn't you, if you had to endure the wrath of your community and the media, and actually had to battle your government all the way up to the Supreme Court simply to be left alone to be with the one you love?
Karen @ 35:
Maybe.
With all due respect the the people who carry guns and stand in harms way on behalf of their nation, this is the sort of person I consider heroic.
But the final para of the NYT death notice says:
Rest in Peace. Thank you.
Bravo for Ms. Loving.
She had integrity and courage.
It's too bad that the flake that it looks like the dems are going to present to us can't
bring his sorry ass around to support the rights of homosexuals to marry.
Because, he says, of his (get your vomit bags ready) religious beliefs.
Nyc La Brets @ 33:
Barack Obummer does not support gay marriage.
Yeah, he's doing well - but so what?
Thank goodness for the Lovings. They helped take down one of the more repulsive portions of the kind of world that Bush wants. I love her story and how it stands in such stark contrast to the evil bastards who are still running things today. At the time Dumbya was kicking off his South Carolina primary campaign at Bob Jones University (sic), where they don't allow interracial dating, I was getting ready to propose to a girl whom I wouldn't have been able to marry under the old laws.
Horray for the Lovings, and keep fighting the good fight.
RobertTaylor @ 40:
If memory serves, the only 2008 Democratic presidential candidates who favor gay marriage are Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel.
I only wish a real hero like Ms. Loving would receive at least half of the press as Hannah Montana's shoulder blades.
Karen @ 43:
You're right.
What a disappointing bunch these "top tier" candidates are.
The media - left, right and centre - buried Kucinich and Gravel with ridicule.
But - bottom line - we have a candidate running against McCain who hasn't the guts he was born with.
He doesn't know about human rights. He can't identify with minorities.
He can go f-ck himself.
Number 5 post, "Be ye not deceived." An active unrepentent homosexual proves they aren't a Christian. The same with adultery, stealing and everything else that is morally wrong. Now if you struggle against any of those things then yes you can call yourself a Christian IF, I repeat IF you have given your life and heart to Christ and are truely born again.
Login or Register to post comments.