LGBT Racism

A Morning Bigotry Quiz

See if you can name which of the following statements was made about same-sex marriage, and which was made about interracial marriage.

“They cannot possibly have any progeny, and such a fact sufficiently justifies those laws which forbid the intermarriage of blacks and whites.”

“[It] is not only unnatural, but is always productive of deplorable results. Our daily observation shows us, that the offspring of these unnatural connections are generally sickly and effeminate [...]They are productive of evil, and evil only, without any corresponding good.”

State legislators spoke out against such an “abominable” type of relationship, warning that it will eventually “pollute” America.

“Why forbidden? Simply because natural instinct revolts at it as wrong.”

“Unnatural and immoral.”

“Any effort [would be] a calamity full of the saddest and gloomiest portent to the generations that are to come after us.”

“Although there is no verse in the Bible…the whole plan of God…down through the ages indicates that [it] is not best for man.”

“I believe that the tendency to classify all persons who oppose [this type of relationship] as ‘prejudiced’ is in itself a prejudice,” a psychologist said. “Nothing of any significance is gained by such a marriage.”


They’re all about interracial marriage… and they sound eerily familiar, no?

(h/t Andrew Kirell)

  • D_C_Wilson

    Someone should read this entire list to Clarence Thomas. Preferably with his wife standing next to him.

  • IrishGrrrl

    Bigotry is universal and timeless. The only thing that changes is our ability to recognize it.

  • mrbrink

    Line by line, it sounds like every argument heard this week uttered from the mouths of Scalia, Alito, and Roberts. Heroes of the right.

    You know, I hate to beat this drum, but I just got around to reading the entire Lawyers, Guns & Money thread that Ashby linked to and commented on yesterday, and I think it’s worth noting that while there’s been a good amount of time spent pointing out Glenn Greenwald’s tendency toward counter-productive electoral politics, I think it’s important to remember that Greenwald, who is gay, also spent weeks/months tearing down Elena Kagan– pretty much poisoning her well and accusing her of being an usurping O-Bot sleeper cell apologist for the perpetuation of the surveillance state, but it was, in fact, Justice Kagan who made the some of the strongest counter-arguments this week in defense of marriage equality ever spoken by a sitting Supreme Court justice. Because she’s an O-Bot apologist.

    • IrishGrrrl

      What makes GG so disgusting to me is that while he is advocating for people like the Paul’s who would treat homosexuals like second class citizens and advocating against people like Kagan who would treat them as equals he does so while he living in Brazil or wheretheeffever. Of course he’s all for these people and their hideous policies in the U.S. as they won’t affect him in the slightest. He’s the worst example of a Glibertarian I have ever seen. He talks the talk but doesn’t do the walk. And for that, he can eff off.

      PS: This isn’t a rant against ex-pats, it’s a rant against ex-pats who are disingenuous, hypocritical, irresponsible and completely lacking in healthy self-introspection.

      • mrbrink

        No, I know exactly what you mean. Greenwald has no worries about having his constitutional rights and protections honored as a married man in Brazil, so he can afford to poison the well for everyone else by standing up on the edge and pissing into the well of the only Supreme Court justice he’s ever heard in his lifetime to stand up for marriage equality when, and where, it counted. To me, It’s just another example of his privilege and pretend priorities. Turns out, Justice Kagan had his back, and everyone else’s in America who might want to adopt children or live a life free from institutional discrimination. President Obama made that happen and Greenwald tried to stop him. I just wondered how he felt about that.

  • zirgar

    “I believe that the tendency to classify all persons who oppose [this type of relationship] as ‘prejudiced’ is in itself a prejudice…” This appears to be the original, “You’re racist for calling me racist.”

  • Draxiar

    I want so badly to see Monsanto get uttlery fucking annihilated in the most violent and bloody way possible…I have for a long time.

  • bphoon

    So each season, the farmer has to buy new Monsanto seeds to plant.

    Reminds me of cell phone manufacturers before they standardized on the micro-usb plug for charging cables. Anything to suck a couple more dollars out of the pockets of working people.

    I’m sure Vernon Bowman is on the verge of sucking Monsanto dry by using descendent seeds for a second planting. I’m sure farmers like him who are buying commodity seeds from their local grain elevator have Monsanto with one foot in the bankruptcy court’s door.

  • D_C_Wilson

    “three corporations, including Monsanto– control more than 50% of the global seed market.”

    And the CEOs of those three corporations are on the phone right now with their chief lobbyists demanding that they get to work on controlling the other half.

  • muselet

    Monsanto says that if it allowed Bowman to keep replanting his seeds it would undermine its business model …

    And altering its business model is of course unthinkable.

    The legal saga revolves around Monsanto’s aggressive protection of its soybean known as Roundup Ready, which have been genetically engineered to be resistant to its Roundup herbicide or its generic equivalents. When Bowman – or thousands of other farmers just like him – plant Monsanto’s seeds in the ground they are obliged to only harvest the resulting crop, not keep any of it back for planting the next year. So each season, the farmer has to buy new Monsanto seeds to plant.

    However, farmers are able to buy excess soybeans from local grain elevators, many of which are likely to be Roundup Ready due to the huge dominance Monsanto has in the market. Indeed in Indiana it is believed more than 90% of soybeans for sale as “commodity seeds” could be such beans, each containing the genes Monsanto developed.

    If Monsanto wants absolute control of its soybeans, then every year it should buy up all the commodity seeds that might be patented by Monsanto. Otherwise, it seems to me—I cannot emphasize enough that I’m not a lawyer—the company isn’t adequately protecting its patents.


  • Brutlyhonest

    I suspect he’ll lose because the deck is seriously stacked against him – monsanto has paid a lot of legal bribes to ensure the laws favor them.

    A funny (to me) aside is how often it is necessary to turn to a UK news source to read about much of the horribleness that happens in the US.

  • nicole

    “three corporations, including Monsanto– control more than 50% of the global seed market.”

    Nothing less than a fucking travesty, a prime example of corporate overreach .

    Good luck, indeed, Mr. Bowman. It’s about time someone stood up to these corporate bullies!