Should interracial marriage be legal?

[BBF]

That is exactly correct. Especially since we all started off somewhere in Africa.

I doubt that, unless my ancestors went thru some bleach factory that changed genes as well.

[BBF]

I agree with the post that culture is more important then skin color but not in all cases.
The "mix" that comes to mind is "black' with something other.
Once visible American "black" enters the picture, even in a small amount, the offspring is considered black nevermind all the other parts of the equation.

[squirrellluck]

I guess the thing that strikes me most is the fact that even now with our country tanking  this type of media reporting can so easily distract people from more pressing matters. Mixed marriage is a non issue and is a fact of life.

[yellowtail3]

Should interracial marriage be legal?

Well, it is legal. And if it were not, that would be the state overstepping its bounds (again) into an area it has no business in.

[XD40SC]

That is exactly correct. Especially since we all started off somewhere in Africa.

I doubt that, unless my ancestors went thru some bleach factory that changed genes as well.

It did in a genetic variation way.

[yellowtail3]

And also points toward greater concerns about greater racial-creed-religious biases/bigotry. I.E...just because somebody OKs interacial marriage..doesn't mean they're unbigoted in other related areas.

No, it doesn't mean that they're unbigoted in other related areas. Or that they ARE bigoted in unrelated areas.

[Casull]

No, it doesn't mean that they're unbigoted in other related areas. Or that they ARE bigoted in unrelated areas.

Come on Yellow, leaping to conclusions is the only exercise TM gets. 

[45-70.gov]

legal  and marriage  should not be germain

the law should not dictate  private matters..whether  interracial  or fags
really no ones business  and should not change any legal standing or tax  code

[jimster]

Marry any woman that pulls your heart strings, nothing else matters.

The poll, regardless of reliability, etc.....is alarming. And also points toward greater concerns about greater racial-creed-religious biases/bigotry.

Most polls are alarming, mainly because they are bogus polls and not even close to what is real. Polls now days are designed to give people a rise and cause trouble. 

Go back through these posts...and you'll find a decent poll already...seems almost all of us agree if not all.......keep government out, and marry the man or woman you love.

So the real poll has already been taken.  We are all normal enough here to have our own little poll and be much more accurate than anything else out there.  Far as racism goes, less of a problem than you think, it's blown up for effect, and usually, the first one to bring it up is the racist, or they would not be thinking about it constantly. 

[mechanic]

First of all, yes interracial marriage should be legal.  Secondly, who did this poll, and what questions did they ask, and how were they phrased?  Thirdly, why only republican's polled?  What has politics got to do with it?  Most of the racial bigots in the south historically have been democrat, but with changing demographics and opinions, what has politics to do with this?

Just another "bait em and snag em" poll.

Ben

[Casull]

Come on Yellow, leaping to conclusions is the only exercise TM gets.

Usual Cheap shot

I dare say I disagree TM.  You said:

The poll, regardless of reliability, etc.....is alarming.

"regardless of reliability"  Did you really mean this?  Sooo, whether it's accurate, true, whatever, you're going to make your stand on the conclusion you've already leapt to.

[Casull]

I'll say this sloooowly for you TM.  My concern with your post was not nitpicking, but rather alarm at your conclusion that this poll is reason for concern "regardless of reliability".  Reliability is of paramount importance.  If the poll is not reliable, it is MEANINGLESS.  You're sounding like those democrats in Congress that argued that the seriousness of the charge is controlling, not the weight of the evidence.  Talk about putting the cart before the horse.

[45-70.gov]

so  why don't we just make this thread a poll

or start another thread/poll

maybe even a poll  for inter-faith marriage

is it  ok for a man to marry a muslim  woman ,
,,but  NOT  ok for a muslim man to marry and enslave a non muslim woman

also  ....bow many people have something against a mixed marriage
but  feel the are  wrong for  feeling that  way??

and who  will admit that openly....or even to themselves

[45-70.gov]

yep

[Casull]

How can I have a bias against "gay marriage"?  The term is an oxymoron.  By definition a "marriage" is a union between a man and woman.  Therefore, "gay marriage" cannot exist.  So, how can I be biased against something that does not exist?

[BBF]

How can I have a bias against "gay marriage"?  The term is an oxymoron.  By definition a "marriage" is a union between a man and woman.  Therefore, "gay marriage" cannot exist.  So, how can I be biased against something that does not exist?

All true except that a number of States and Provinces have expanded that definition to include same gender.
Everytime I think we have reached the very heights of depravity I find the limit hasn't been achieved .

[45-70.gov]

How can I have a bias against "gay marriage"?  The term is an oxymoron.  By definition a "marriage" is a union between a man and woman.  Therefore, "gay marriage" cannot exist.  So, how can I be biased against something that does not exist?

your definition  is  that..yours

neither you  nor  I  or the government should define marriage for some one else

all the government has any business doing 
 is to enforce a contract between 2  OR MORE  people

if  WE  have to defime marriage  then i ask
why must you speak and think in first person plural....that is a sign of a liberal

[Casull]

your definition  is  that..yours

neither you  nor  I  or the government should define marriage for some one else

all the government has any business doing 
 is to enforce a contract between 2  OR MORE  people

if  WE  have to defime marriage  then i ask
why must you speak and think in first person plural....that is a sign of a liberal

Don't know what your problem is with my post, but "I" did not define marriage.  Thousands of years of tradition and the various churches did that.  But, I'm not so arrogant as to ignore that definition.  As to "first person plural", the reason that I spoke of "I", is that "I" was responding to TM, who said that "most have a bias against gay marriage".  "I" was letting him know that "I" was not one of those people.  "I" was not speaking for, or to, you.  And, "I" would dare say that thinking that each may define anything as they see fit is the sign of a liberal.

[45-70.gov]

sorry if you took offence

''I'' is first person singular
''WE''  is first person plural

marriage should not be legal or illegal...other words  not a legal issue
'WE''   are all individuals  and don't need  others defining anything for  ''US''

i do enjoy your post and mean  no offence
and feel free to argue with  me...as i will not take a difference of opinion  personally

i am sensitive  to government meddling  in a persons private affairs
after  all the ''LEGAL''  cost associated with my divorce
and  my TAX  status as a single  man
 

[Casull]

45-70, I did mistakenly take offense to your post.  Also wasn't sure why you were referring to "I" as first person plural.    Like many, I sometimes take offense where none was meant.  Unfortunately, the written word does not lend itself to inflection or tone.  If there were not rights and responsibilities that go along with marriage, I might be more inclined to consider your thoughts on marriage.  But, government is not meant to enforce all contracts between two or more persons.  When such a contract violates public policy, then the government has no business enforcing it.

[BBF]

Two out of three marriages in Hawaii are inter-racial.  We love it!

I find that interesting.
 
Having had the pleasure and privilege of visiting Hawaii( Big Island) twice I noticed the mixing.
 
 It felt natural to me although generally speaking I have some reservation on this subject. Perhaps it is the magic of Hawaii and the South Pacific.
 If I could live there I would be packing my shorts.

[Casull]

Most gays don't abide by Casull's rules or definiton of marriage.

Please TM, not MY rules or definition.  I'm not proclaiming anything, just acknowledging that which already exists.

[45-70.gov]

by the way

i find gay marriage disgusdting....glad  none in my family
personally  don't like inter-racial marriage

and  i am wrong  for having  negative feelings if that makes them happy
there should not be a law against  it

as far as god  goes....he is big enough to take care of it himself...he don't need my help