The Loving Decision

Newsweek
November 15, 2008
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and best-selling novelist Anna Quindlen writes, "The last word here goes to an authority on battling connubial bigotry. On the anniversary of the Loving decision last year, the bride wore tolerance. Mildred Loving, mother and grandmother, who once had cops burst into her bedroom because she was sleeping with her own husband, was quoted in a rare public statement saying she believed all Americans, 'no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry.' She concluded, 'That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.'"[Link]
Read more about Loving v. Virginia.

Read More »

Howard Simon: Amendment 2 is not about ‘gay marriage’

The Gainesville Sun
October 28, 2008
"One day, we all will look back on the idea that government could have the power to dictate who adults can marry with as much bewilderment as we now, shamefully, wonder how we allowed government the power to ban interracial marriage – until the U.S. Supreme Court ended the legal basis for that prejudice in the appropriately named landmark 1967 ACLU case of Loving v. Virginia." [Link]
Read more about what's happening in Florida.

Read More »

Marriage ruling has ‘beautiful observations’

The New Haven Register
October 15, 2008
"Quoting from the 1967 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia, our court writes that the freedom to marry 'has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men and women.'" [Link]
Read more about Loving v. Virginia.

Read More »

OPINION: Anti-gay marriage ban just like ban on interracial marriage

Gilroy Dispatch
September 8, 2008
More than 40 years ago, laws banning interracial marriage wouldn't have been repealed if put to a vote. It took the United States Supreme Court to tell Americans that they were not living up to the promises of the Constitution: In 1967, in Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. Those opposed to interracial marriage made many of the same arguments about "nature," the Bible and tradition and made the same predictions of dire consequences that are hurled today by same-sex marriage opponents.In both cases, these arguments are poppycock. [Link]

Read More »

The Case for a Right of Marriage Recognition: Why Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Should Protect Sa

Findlaw
July 9, 2008
Steve Sanders writes, "I believe scholars, legislators, and judges accept the status quo for same-sex marriages because of a lingering, perhaps subconscious, belief that they are not quite 'real' marriages. From such a belief, another belief follows: that the people who enter into such marriages have no legitimate expectation they will be treated with the deference the law accords to virtually all other marriages. But our law should not tolerate different classes of marriages, some more favored than others." [Link]

Read More »

I Don’t (But I Might Soon)

AFF Doublethink Online
June 24, 2008
Dorian Davis writes that, "it seems clear that the long-term fate of the issue is already settled. The question that remains, then, is how long it will take the Republican party to notice." [Link]

Read More »

The right to love

Los Angeles Times
June 17, 2008
The LA Times editorial staff notes same-sex unions do not diminish the bonds of marriage, they uphold them. (Link)

Read More »

Marriage is not about gender or race, but love and family

San Jose Mercury News
May 20, 2008

Marla Scharf talks about growing up when her parents were prohibited from marrying in numerous states across the nation because they were an interracial couple, and honors the CA Supreme Court upholding the freedom to marry for same-sex couples saying, “I believe that our nation's promise of 'justice and liberty for all' applies to every person in the same way.” (Link)

Read More »

The moral compass of Mildred Loving

Washington Blade
May 9, 2008
In honor of Mildred Loving, a defendant in the landmark Loving v. Virginia case which ended race discrimination in marriage, Lane Hudson writes about her courageous support for marriage equality and her belief that “a particular religious belief should not interfere with our government granting that right.” (Link)

Read More »

Mildred Loving, a pivotal figure in civil rights history, is remembered

Washington Blade
May 6, 2008
Said Evan Wolfson, "The defenders of the discriminatory laws invoked the Bible, invoked their own view of morality and made similar kinds of claims about the disastrous consequences if interracial couples were treated the same." (Link)

Read More »

« First  <  2 3 4 5 >