Citing 'Christian Belief,' Mississippi Event Hall Refuses Service To Interracial Couple

[conuly]

The owner of the venue then posted an apology on Facebook, explaining they had met with their pastor and discovered no Bible passage forbidding interracial marriage.

“The revelation was apparently quite surprising for the author, who referenced being taught that races should remain separate while growing up,” Newsweek wrote, paraphrasing the Facebook apology.

Well, all's well that end's well I guess...?

But I'm damn certain that the author was 100% taught that growing up. There are fundiegelical types that still teach that, or at least strongly imply it. The rise of modern Evangelicism and Fundamentalism in America is very, very strongly linked to the Civil Rights Movement - and not in a good way.

Comments

[8hyenas]

I have two strong church memories from early childhood (from two different churches, both mainstream).

1) Holding a pamphlet showing how soon minorities were going to out-breed the white race. As the only obviously brown person there, I was absolutely thrilled by this new information.

2) Being told that due to my original sin of being mixed race I was going to hell.

[conuly]

That must've been fun.

[thewayne]

I lived in a city where white people were the minority - Las Cruces, NM. Lovely place, especially compared to the place that I live next to, Alamogordo, where they're trying to re-invent the '50s - and failing.

The decline in white reproduction rates has been a strong trend for a long time, and my wife and I and several couples that I know are happy to be a part of that by not having kids.

Nice of them to tell you to your face that you're going to hell because you exist, not for something you've done. And they don't understand why church attendance is steadily falling.

[jessie_c]

I defy them to find even one verse in the bible which supports racism.

[conuly]

If they're strongly patriarchal/authoritarian they won't bother, because their current pastor said otherwise.

However, if you are diligent enough you can cherrypick quotes in the Bible to support almost any point of view. If you're interested you can google to find the ones used to support "no interracial couples" - though most of the people still supporting that line will swear up and down that they have no animosity towards other races, therefore, they're not racist. They've got no sense at all, is what I'm saying.

[jessie_c]

Precisely my point :)

[spikethemuffin]

I was briefly associated with a church that concerned itself way too much with "miscegenation." (They were seriously horrid and under FBI watch.) They used Deuteronomy 22:9-11, which prohibits eating fruits from vineyards where plant hybridization is possible, plus Leviticus 19:19, prohibiting mixed-fiber clothing, as justification. Apparently God is the sort of person who would throw a fit if His mashed potatoes touched the carrots on the plate.

Interestingly, they would not eat broccoli-cauliflower crosses, but would eat flour from modern wheat. But the pastor argued that his grandson, who was half-Hispanic, should be sterilized.

I STILL get the shudders thinking about them for too long.

[conuly]

WOW.

[jessie_c]

So in other words, there isn't one. That was my point :)

Interesting to see someone trying to quote from something other than Leviticus 20:13 though.

[spikethemuffin]

Well, yes.

[adrian_turtle]

I don't think it's prudent to challenge racists to look for more proof-texts in the bible. There are quite a few problematic verses. I can't think of any that specifically forbid interracial marriage, but several verses allow for slavery or war crimes. Religion, as practiced, isn't a handful of words in isolation.

[conuly]

And as we've all seen with gays, if they can't specifically find it in the Bible they can rely on their own view of the naturalistic fallacy. Nevermind that their facts are wrong - thousands of species exhibit homosexual behavior, there is no scientific basis to "race" and no clear-cut way of separating one arbitrary racial group from another - these so-called "facts", to them, "prove" God's will.

[sylvaine]

:|||||

[conuly]

Yup. And I've gone on this merry-go-round so many times with Christians who swear up and down that discriminating against gays is totes okay because first amendment and it's not at all the same as discriminating against interracial couples because that's not ever been part of Christianity and I want to find all those and send them this article right now. (Why that would work when previous iterations of "no, dear, these are the real facts" didn't I don't know, but hope springs eternal.)

[oursin]

Do I not recall that somewhere in ?Exodus, Moses marries an Ethopian woman and his sister Miriam rebukes him and he withers her hand as a punishment? The message is fairly clearly against policing inter-racial marriage.

[conuly]

Yeah, and in some parts of the Bible it's "don't provoke your kid to anger" and in others it's "beat your child, he won't die".

I don't really want to amplify their stupid-ass arguments by googling them and reposting them here. They've gone ahead and cherrypicked, and now most of the ones who did that pretend they never ever did.

[author_by_night]

I think they're just pointing out that the Bible had that specific passage, although it's possible the Bible had other noes. They're not trying to amplify bigotry, just adding to the conversation by pointing out a specific contradiction.

Also, I don't think "don't provoke your child" is necessarily contradictory if you believe by not sparing the rod, you'll make them more obedient. Not that that isn't a sick sentiment, I'm just saying, that's the idea.

[conuly]

I definitely don't think they're trying to amplify, and didn't mean to sound that way! I just don't want to go looking it up myself.

[author_by_night]

Oops. I think tone on the internet was at play here. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[alexcat]

The belief is alive and well among the fundies where I live and that's almost everyone in rural North Carolina.

[conuly]

Blech.

[thewayne]

LOVE the Fundiegelical word! Definitely going to have to try and remember that one!

To quote the eminent sage Bugs Bunny, "What a bunch of maroons".

[conuly]

If you wanna really piss 'em off, call them legalists.

[thewayne]

The thing that drives me nuts is they're completely taking Christ out of Christianity.  I love the John Lennon quote: "I like Jesus but some of his followers are a bit thick."  Apparently Politico did a HUGE expose on Fallwell Jr., I loaded it in to Pocket this morning but haven't read it beyond an overview that appeared in Slate.  Quite the little scamp, that Jerry.

[wolby]

Never heard that one, but I'm slightly worried that's related to 'talmudic' as an (antisemitic) insult? :/

[conuly]

None of them have ever heard of Talmud, so probably not.

[redbird]

I'm not (and wasn't raised) Christian, but I seem to recall a verse about their being "no Greek and Jew" in Christ. Then again, of course the people who can cherry-pick the Jewish Bible to claim that God is strongly in favor of monogamous heterosexuality, while ignoring all the stuff about unclean animals and periodic forgiveness of debt, have no problem cherry-picking elsewhere.

(My only strong opinion on this is, it's an anthology of work by many writers over several centuries, of course it's not an internally consistent logical system. And that's before you get to, people's opinions are based on lots of things, and they reach conclusions and then look for arguments to justify those conclusions. Meta-level: I'm noticing the historical/literary fact of how the books were collected, someone else is emphasizing the results because they believe/were told that God's hand was on the translation.)

[conuly]

Yeah, and there's also one about being no male and female there, and yet somehow that's not as important as the fact that Jesus only had male apostles. (If that's even the case and not vandalism by later scribes.) People see what they strongly want to see.

[greghousesgf]

yet another bible thumping racist. oo what a shock. (eyeroll)

[conuly]

I was stunned, really.

[greghousesgf]

I'm not. I was being sarcastic.

[conuly]

So was I.

[gwydion]

It's not. They are still barring Queer folk from the venue.

[conuly]

Should've seen that one coming.

[ayebydan]

Taught as a kid fine but noooooo influence of the outside world in the last few decades hinted that was BS? I can't with these nuts.

[conuly]

Yeah, well, despite what the far right likes to claim it sure as hell ain't us bleeding hearts and atheists who are living in a bubble.

[silveradept]

Indeed. I suspect they were told what the "mark of Cain" was as part of that belief system while they were growing up.