“The Changing Definition of Marriage in California”: A Reader Writes
There are so many clear and thoughtful voices in America. Every once in a while you run into one. Like this comment from a reader of the San Jose Mercury News, who responded to an article published in October. You can read his full comments on Mercury News. Here are a few quotes:
“Marriage changed to support women’s rights:
Beginning with statehood, women of California began pushing suffrage. Suffrage meant more then just the right to vote. It was a demand for equality under the law; property rights, guardianship of their children, and access to education. Many saw this as a threat to the traditional institution of marriage.”
“Marriage changed to support minority rights:
Anti-miscegenation laws were laws that prohibited the intermarriage and sometimes interracial sex of white people and people of different races. The first California law prohibiting marriages was in 1880. California legislature prohibited the issuance of licenses for marriage between a white person and “a Negro, mulatto (mixed ancestry of black and white), or Mongolian (yellow or Chinese).”
The Japanese are added by special legislation in 1909 to the list of those barred from marrying whites.
In 1945, California legislature passed a bill that was signed by Governor Earl Warren, prohibiting marriage between whites and “Negroes, mulattos, Mongolians, and Malays (Filipinos)”.”
“Finally in 1948, the California Supreme Court (activist judges??) ruled in “Perez vs. Sharp,†against the state’s anti-miscegenation laws, stating that they were based on racial distinctions that were “by their very nature, odious to a free people”.
In 1958, the first Gallup poll conducted on the subject of interracial marriage revealed that 94% of whites opposed them. Interracial marriage was still thought to be a threat to the traditional institution of marriage.”
“Will marriage change to support the rights of same-sex couples?”
I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.