Kentucky Church bans interracial couples

reply to post by Misoir


I'm sorry for singling you out Misoir, I am usually a big fan of your work in ATS, which is why I have been surprised at a couple of your posts recently, having to double check it was you who actually made them.

I don't have a problem with people who want to protect their racial heritage, but not at the expense of not allowing inter racial marriages.

You can't help who you fall in love with, I mean one day Misoir you may meet a beautiful Latino or Black woman and fall in love and want to raise a family. Would that make you guilty of destroying your racial heritage?

Why limit yourself to a small specific genetic gene pool?

reply to post by Misoir


I have a grandfather like you. Dis owned me a few years back. I guess 7 black grandkids was more then he could bare to bad he is so ignorant, that he now has lost out on ALL his great grandkids lives. Including my sisters 5 little blonde headed babies. Sucks to be him. Hopefully, if any of your children have "mixed" kids, you will be able to look beyond their skin color, and get to know them "on the inside", just like you would the person in the grocery store.

Yes sir, THATS what JESUS would have done! Gotta love those bible thumpers!

reply to post by woodwardjnr


I do not believe one can, or even should, stop free will. If a person wants to be involved with someone of a different race there is nothing I can, nor would I ever try, do to forcefully stop it. But I will make my opinion perfectly clear so that there is no confusion on the issue. As for myself, I have never liked anyone of a different race any more than a friend. I grew up with a few Filipino friends, great people, and had one black friend but that is all they ever would be to me. Besides the fact that they are of a different race I am not attracted to anyone who does not have very fair skin and light colored eyes anyway, even many Europeans are too tanned for my tastes. Yes I am picky.

As for getting past someone else being of mixed heritage, I have gotten past that. It was never their choice to be born of two different racial parents, which I do not hold against them. My cousin, whom I love, is black and White, a great kid. He can stay in my house; eat my food, etc… (But not sleep in my bed; I will not let anyone do that regardless of race).

My entire point is racial/ethnic preservation, as I said before; everything else is basically a non-issue to me in regards to race.

I am sorry but every time people say "ignorant" so carelessly it reminds me of this:

Here's the likely real story....


That tiny little church has little income and the Pastor schemed this up. He likely insured the church for big bucks and is waiting for someone to get mad and go burn it down so he can collect his big check.


Smart people will ignore him and his church. They've got nothing to offer the world.

No Non-Profit can be racist. Or it will lose it's Non-Profit status. Somebody should just file a complaint with the IRS to revoke their Non-Profit status. Let's see how they pay their Property Taxes after they lose their Non-Profit Status.

Originally posted by Misoir
My entire point is racial/ethnic preservation, as I said before; everything else is basically a non-issue to me in regards to race.

What is "good" about racial/ethnic preservation?
What is "bad" about losing the racial/ethnic barriers that separate us?

Blimey.. when will people like Misoir realise that race is irrelevant? You cannot seriously be as deluded to think that believing you need to protect your 'race' and not ever cross your genes with another 'race' is not racist? Anyone that sees any difference between any two races are generally...racist whether you wear a white pointy hat or Swastika or not.

So many people disagree with interracial relationships... I'm mixed race AND British, my mother is of English/ Irish and Indian Decent and my father is of Caribbean decent (2nd generation, so was born in England). I have no confusion about who I am or where I belong and in general, neither does any other person I've ever met (bar the odd racist bully at school). I am a British citizen with British parents (and just for the record have a decent IQ of around 120). I am married to a white woman who happens to be half Ukrainian. She has a degree and is a teacher. We will one day hopefully, have beautiful intelligent children who will also be mixed race. Now where in that lies any problem?? I see none. Love, happiness and health are all that matter in this sad, greedy, deluded world.

Please somebody enlighten me on why it is a bad thing to be mixed race.

Originally posted by fiftyfifty

Please somebody enlighten me on why it is a bad thing to be mixed race.

Because people won't be able to categorize you if you're mixed!
(shakes fist)
Curse you! You demographic ruiner, you!

I applaud those enlightened ones here whom are against racism in any form or mealy mouthed excuses used. Those racist groups do have the freedom of expression, selfish and hatefilled as it be, as they have free will, so dont let them bother or rile you. They are a joke in this day and age.

May this minority extinct out eventually, just like the dinosaurs, and do not obstruct mankind's progress and evolution as one race.

.
A. “. . . love thy neighbor as thyself”
Matt. 19:19:

.
B. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created EQUAL, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

- Thomas Jefferson.1776. Declaration of Independence.

.
C. "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges ... of citizens ... nor ... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny ... the equal protection of the laws."

- 14th Amendment. Bill of RIghts. US Constitution.

Therefore:-

1. What constitutional right did that racist Kentucky small minded group used to curtail the rights of others, other than private property ownership law?

If they had acted out only under private property laws, then they hold no moral authority to disallow a religious union between 2 humans created by our common Creator, despite whatever names this atrocious group and their supporters wished to claim with, and should be re-educated against heresy and acting against the tenets of both religion and secular laws.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

What is "good" about racial/ethnic preservation?

It preserves the uniquely different people of this world. From Polish to Britons to Egyptians to Persians to everyone else under the sun; all of those are different people with different cultures in different places. Unlike the Left I view the world as the true multicultural area, each country being a representation of a different culture making this world unique. People should be proud of their ethnicity and racial heritage, how we even came to the point of this being an issue is shocking to me.

What is "bad" about losing the racial/ethnic barriers that separate us?

Wow, is this question for real? Look, when you try and make all people one your end result is likely rejection of that attempt and if you are successful most likely you have reduced people to the lowest common denominator. How can you think that everyone being virtually the same is a good thing? I actually believe we need to encourage the self-determination of more people so that they are less subjected to the cultural influence of others.

For me advocating the abolition of different cultures/ethnicities/races, regardless of what form it is in, is equivalent to genocide. It fits right in the UN ‘Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide’:

Article 2

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Source

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Deuteronomy 22:9: "Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with diverse seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled."

Leviticus 19:19: "Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind ..."

Deuteronomy 7:2-3: "And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them: Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.

Genesis 28:1: "And Isaac called Jacob, and blessed him, and charged him, and said unto him, Thou shalt not take a wife of the daughters of Canaan."

Deuteronomy 23:2: "A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD."

Jeremiah 13:23: "Can an Ethiopian change the color of his skin? Can a leopard take away its spots? Neither can you start doing good, for you have always done evil."




Just saying...

reply to post by Misoir


Old testament book specifically aimed to guide jews, and you dare used as qoutes to rationalise your racist mean spirited view of your fellow brothers and sisters as well as a racist group that supposedly claimed to be followers of the Messiah?

Any other straw you wish to grab?

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
This kind of mentality is still around, especially in the South.

This was in a small, 'Free Will Baptist' church in the south.
Considering where this is ... I'm not surprised.

I got stuck living in Alabama for nine years. If you weren't the right color; if you didn't go to the right church; if you didn't speak with the correct southern drawwwwwwwl, then you were discriminated against and also targeted by the local fundamentalist churches for 'conversion'. (endless knocks on the door, pamphlets shoved in your face, etc etc). The worst perps of this in our town were those from the Baptist and Church of Christ churches. It was like they were dueling in town, seeing who could be the most bigoted and ignorant.

First words out of anyones mouth down there upon meeting you .... I swear this is true ... would be 'so what church do you go to?" Eventually we got our own pamphlets and whenever the conversion squad would come knocking on our door we'd answer it with a basket full of our own tracts ... any tracts we could find that were opposite of what they were pushing. We turned it into great 'in your face' fun. ha ha

Thankfully we now live outside Philly. Haven't had a single person ask what church I go to or make a funny face because my daughter is adopted and darker than they are. There are racist events reported in the paper, but strangely enough it's usually so called 'reverse racism'.

Originally posted by Misoir
It preserves the uniquely different people of this world. From Polish to Britons to Egyptians to Persians to everyone else under the sun; all of those are different people with different cultures in different places.

And what is good about that?

Unlike the Left I view the world as the true multicultural area, each country being a representation of a different culture making this world unique.

A. What does politics have to do with it?
B. "making this world unique"??? As compared to the other worlds, where everyone is of one race? And we know how dangerous and nasty those worlds are... What are you talking about?

Again, what is good about preservation of races?

Look, when you try and make all people one ...

No one is talking about forcing or MAKING people into one.

How can you think that everyone being virtually the same is a good thing?

I don't think anything of the sort. But if we were to accept interracial marriages and mixed race kids, everyone wouldn't become "virtually the same". That's freaking ridiculous! That suggests that all white people are "virtually the same"... which is totally false.

For me advocating the abolition of different cultures/ethnicities/races, regardless of what form it is in, is equivalent to genocide.

Who is advocating the abolition of ANYTHING here? You're reading entirely too much into my questions, which you didn't even answer... I'm not talking about abolishing anything. I'm talking about the natural evolution of a planet's population. What are you so afraid of?

I'm not talking about forcing, either way. We shouldn't be forcing races to remain pure OR forcing them to mix. It should be a FREEDOM issue. If people want to mix, then they can, if they don't they don't have to.

reply to post by Misoir

That was a good thing? The Feds had no right to tell a state what they could do with their marriage laws. There is not one amendment in the Constitution that says "everyone has a right to marry who they want", so where did the Feds get the power to enforce this 'equality' on the states? They pulled it out of their rear end, per usual.

The civil rights act of 1866 actually. Grants the same rights that whites have to any non white, specifically blacks. However it's been interpreted over the years to apply to all non whites.
Your argument is invalid. Federal law trumps states law due to the supremacy clause in the constitution.

As for you being a Racialist. Well that's your thing and if you wish to do it and it makes you happy. Then go ahead and knock yourself out.

However please keep in mind that your rights begin where mine end. Your ideology should not interfere with anyone else s rights to do whatever the hell they want to do. As long as it's not against the law.

Johnscreek is not in the town of Pikeville. It's a rural area just like all the other rural areas around the world that are chock full of xenophobia.
Small Baptist churches like this are notorious for splitting. It happens when the congregation gets to vote as opposed to a decision being handed down.
Sure, there are racists in this church and the surrounding culture, just add them to long list of racists in other faiths and cultures that wouldn't accept this couple. While we're at it, let's compare apples to apples. Why has this couple chosen the wife's hillbilly culture of eastern Kentucky over the husband's culture in Zimbabwe? Could it be that, along with the fact that one of the poorest places in America still has more opportunity than Africa, the consequences of an interracial marriage in his culture might be a bit more severe than simply being "churched".
If I'm going to sit in judgement on her family, church and culture, I'm going to hold his to the same standard.

I think we should send some mail to this church, which consist of Mandingo & Lexx Steels International, Interracial Tour. .

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

And what is good about that?

If you even have to ask that question it means no matter what kind of answer I give it could never be good enough. It is like arguing theism with an atheist, either you want to believe in God or you do not, people who do not believe are highly unlikely to ever truly understand the theists logic regardless of his arguing style.

A. What does politics have to do with it?

Ideology plays a huge part in shaping a person’s worldview in the modern age, shockingly so. Those who are generally associated with the egalitarian/universalist point of view are those who are culturally left-wing. Anyone who was genuinely a Conservative (not Libertarian) would be an advocate for preservation of a specific people, in a specific place, at a specific time.

B. "making this world unique"??? As compared to the other worlds, where everyone is of one race? And we know how dangerous and nasty those worlds are... What are you talking about?

Unique is the wrong word to have used as it implies there is more than one world. Perhaps a better word is great.

Again, what is good about preservation of races?

Because each different ethnicity/race represents a distinct and unique people, different from others culturally, biologically, and physically. This heritage is worth preserving, worth cherishing, and worth loving because it makes you who you are and connects you to other people like yourself. As I said before though, you can only understand this point of view like a person understanding a belief in God, you must want to believe in it.

No one is talking about forcing or MAKING people into one.

I never meant that you want to force people into being one, but rather from my pov you would like everyone to be one and encourage it.

I don't think anything of the sort. But if we were to accept interracial marriages and mixed race kids, everyone wouldn't become "virtually the same". That's freaking ridiculous! That suggests that all white people are "virtually the same"... which is totally false.

If every child was mixed they would all be of the same race thus unique would be gone in that sense. But, I find it funny, so many advocates for this race mixing are never advocates for mass immigration and race mixing in Africa, Middle East, or Asia, why is it only the West?

Who is advocating the abolition of ANYTHING here? You're reading entirely too much into my questions, which you didn't even answer... I'm not talking about abolishing anything. I'm talking about the natural evolution of a planet's population. What are you so afraid of?

I would consider race-mixing de-evolution, not evolution. If we want to take a step back then sure, go that way. I would prefer that each race stay with its own people.

I'm not talking about forcing, either way. We shouldn't be forcing races to remain pure OR forcing them to mix. It should be a FREEDOM issue. If people want to mix, then they can, if they don't they don't have to.

I agree, but in my opinion the same way people vilify those for being against interracial marriages should vilify people for being in favor of it.

reply to post by SeekerofTruth101


Who are these supposed 'brothers and sisters' of mine? I have only one sibling, a sister, and the line ends there. In my view there is no such thing as this mythical made up 'man' of which we are supposed to consider all to be a part of.

"I will simply point out the error of principle that has provided the foundation of this constitution and that has led the French astray since the first moment of their revolution.

The constitution of 1795, like its predecessors, has been drawn up for Man. Now, there is no such thing in the world as Man. In the course of my life, I have seen Frenchmen, Italians, Russians, etc.; I am even aware, thanks to Montesquieu, that one can be a Persian. But, as for Man, I declare that I have never met him in my life. If he exists, I certainly have no knowledge of him.

....This constitution is capable of being applied to all human communities from China to Geneva. But a constitution which is made for all nations is made for none: it is a pure abstraction, a school exercise whose purpose is to exercise the mind in accordance with a hypothetical ideal, and which ought to be addressed to Man, in the imaginary places which he inhabits....

What is a constitution? Is it not the solution to the following problem: to find the laws that are fitting for a particular nation, given its population, its customs, its religion, its geographical situation, its political relations, its wealth, and its good and bad qualities?

Now, this problem is not addressed at all by the Constitution of 1795, which is concerned only with Man." - Joseph de Maistre