Handsy Miniature: Anti-Miscegenation, Jim Crow, and Same-Sex Marriage

By Doctor Comrade

As a fun historical exercise, and for perspective on same-sex marriage debates, go through an anti-same sex marriage speech and replace "gay marriage" with "integration" and "marriage" with "segregation." For example, Senator Ted Cruz:

It is beyond dispute that when the 14th Amendment was adopted 146 years ago, as a necessary post-Civil War era reform, it was not imagined to also mandate INTEGRATION, but that is what the Supreme Court is implying today. The Court is making the preposterous assumption that the People of the United States somehow silently redefined SEGREGATION in 1868 when they ratified the 14th Amendment. Nothing in the text, logic, structure, or original understanding of the 14th Amendment or any other constitutional provision authorizes judges to redefine SEGREGATION for the Nation. It is for the elected representatives of the People to make the laws of SEGREGATION, acting on the basis of their own constitutional authority, and protecting it, if necessary, from usurpation by the courts. SEGREGATION is a question for the States. That is why I have introduced legislation, S. 2024, to protect the authority of state legislatures to define SEGREGATION. And that is why, when Congress returns to session, I will be introducing a constitutional amendment to prevent the federal government or the courts from attacking or striking down state SEGREGATION laws.

How about miscegenation? I only had to change one term in this quote from luminary Governor Bobby Jindal:

I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman OF THE SAME RACE. My faith teaches me that, my Christian faith teaches me that. If the Supreme Court were to throw out our law, our constitutional amendment — I hope they wouldn’t do that — if they were to do that, I certainly will support Ted Cruz and others that are talking about making an amendment in the congress and D.C., a constitutional amendment to allow states to continue to define marriage.

Here's Senator Rand Paul, genuflecting to the more ignorant elements of the party, which he needs to have any chance in a national election:

The party can’t become the opposite of what it is. If you tell people from Alabama, Mississippi or Georgia, ‘You know what, guys, we’ve been wrong, and we’re gonna be the pro-INTEGRATION party,’ they’re either gonna stay home or — I mean, many of these people joined the Republican Party because of these social issues.

These remind me of Alabama Governor George C. Wallace's famous pronouncement during his inaugural address in 1963, when he accused integrationists of terrorizing his state and his culture:

Let us send this message back to Washington, via the representatives who are here with us today. From this day, we are standing up, and the heel of THE GAY AGENDA does not fit the neck of an upright man. Let us rise to the call of freedom-loving blood that is in us, and send our answer to the tyranny that clanks its chains upon the South. In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw a line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say, ONE MAN, ONE WOMAN now, ONE MAN, ONE WOMAN tomorrow and ONE MAN, ONE WOMAN forever.

In 1959, Mildred and Richard Loving pled guilty to violating Section 20-58 of the Virginia Code, which prohibited interracial marriage. The trial judge Leon M. Bazile wrote:

Almighty God created the SEXES MALE AND FEMALE... And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for SAME-SEX marriages. The fact that he separated the SEXES shows that he did not intend for HOMOSEXUALITY.