Couldn't believe it when I came across the following story:

HAMMOND, La. - A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have.

Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

Neither Bardwell nor the couple immediately returned phone calls from The Associated Press. But Bardwell told the Daily Star of Hammond that he was not a racist.

"I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house," Bardwell said. "My main concern is for the children."

‘I feel the children will later suffer’
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.

"I don't do interracial marriages because I don't want to put children in a situation they didn't bring on themselves," Bardwell said. "In my heart, I feel the children will later suffer."

If he does an interracial marriage for one couple, he must do the same for all, he said.

"I try to treat everyone equally," he said.

Thirty-year-old Beth Humphrey and 32-year-old Terence McKay, both of Hammond, say they will consult the U.S. Justice Department about filing a discrimination complaint.

Humphrey told the newspaper she called Bardwell on Oct. 6 to inquire about getting a marriage license signed. She says Bardwell's wife told her that Bardwell will not sign marriage licenses for interracial couples.

"It is really astonishing and disappointing to see this come up in 2009," said American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana attorney Katie Schwartzman. "The Supreme Court ruled as far back as 1963 that the government cannot tell people who they can and cannot marry."

‘He knew he was breaking the law’
The ACLU was preparing a letter for the Louisiana Supreme Court, which oversees the state justices of the peace, asking them to investigate Bardwell and see if they can remove him from office, Schwartzman said.

"He knew he was breaking the law, but continued to do it," Schwartzman said.

According to the clerk of court's office, application for a marriage license must be made three days before the ceremony because there is a 72-hour waiting period. The applicants are asked if they have previously been married. If so, they must show how the marriage ended, such as divorce.

Other than that, all they need is a birth certificate and Social Security card.

The license fee is $35, and the license must be signed by a Louisiana minister, justice of the peace or judge. The original is returned to the clerk's office.

Another reason for a complete separation of marriage and state. Any two adults should be Free to get married at the religious institution of their Choice without government permission or interference.

If the state wants to issue domestic contracts, then they should be made available to any two individuals whether they have sex with each other or not.

that actually raises an interesting point. i've always been bothered that the state dictates that some relationships are more important than others. i.e. people who can visit you in the hospital, can dictate your medical treatment in an emergency, who they can't force you to testify against, etc...

we may be born into a family, but we choose who we have tight bonds with- whether friends, lovers, family, or legal spouses. we choose who we trust. you would think enlightened laws would reflect that.

i disagree completely about making marriage only something that belongs with religion though. many people don't have a religion they ascribe to and it really is more about the concept of a legal social contract than anything else. otherwise people could just say they were married and who cares what the law says. the only reason to care is because of the legal ramifications.

wmou2:

Another reason for a complete separation of marriage and state. Any two adults should be Free to get married at the religious institution of their Choice without government permission or interference.

If the state wants to issue domestic contracts, then they should be made available to any two individuals whether they have sex with each other or not.

EXACTLY!!!!!!

It's for the good of the child.... Obama went and disowned his own mother and the very grandparents that raised him so he could declare himself black..... how's that for gratitude?

That's pretty sick stuff.

Mixed marriages were banned for a reason.

deduction:

i disagree completely about making marriage only something that belongs with religion though. many people don't have a religion they ascribe to and it really is more about the concept of a legal social contract than anything else. otherwise people could just say they were married and who cares what the law says. the only reason to care is because of the legal ramifications.

If an atheist wants to get married in the park, they can get anybody they choose to preside over the ceremony. If they want that person to be a government official, fine. Just not in their official capacity.

I resent the fact that the government has any say at all in marriage. It worked great, when 95% of americans believed in traditional marriage.