Last week, the national news was hit with headlines about Keith Bardwell, a justice of the peace in Louisiana's Tangipahoa Parish (http://www.wtop.com/?nid=104&sid=1786708). The articles revolve around his refusal to marry an interracial couple. His action has stirred up a whirlwind around him, which include Louisiana's governor Bobby Jindal calling for an investigation.
Allow me to preface my comments by saying that I unequivocally disagree with Mr. Bardwell's opinion. In terms of interracial couples, I have dated interracially myself. In fact, all of my dates have been interracial (I can only assume black women are just not interested in me). As far as the children of interracial couples, I have many friends whose children seem quite well-adjusted. That includes my own nieces. Therefore, do I think Mr. Bardwell is wrong? Yes.
As the article pointed out, Miss Humphrey and Mr. McKay did get married. So, Bardwell's refusal was merely a speed bump on their path to matrimony. If it had been me, I would have simply said "okay" and moved on. Instead, they and others made a national incident of the situation.
Personally, I believe his removal sets a bad precedent. Right or wrong, I think that his action was based on his opinion, and I believe everyone has a right to, and should be free to have, his or her own opinion. Where would we be if we were forced to agree on everything? To me, removing him says "You have a job to do; we don't care what you think about it, but you'll do it the way we tell you."
We are human endowed with emotions, consciences, and opinions that permeate everything we do, including our jobs. Removing him diminishes us all because it provides more motivation to make us conform. All to often the words "I was only following orders" have been used as an excuse for far too many tragedies. If your employer asked you to do something that you believed was wrong, wouldn't you want the ability to follow your conscience and refuse?
Please keep in mind that, no, I emphatically do not condone Bardwell's actions. But in the same light I opposed the protest against him. Remember, he has been doing his job for 34 years. If you do not like how he operates, he will be gone soon enough.
This outcry over personal opinion reminds me of a situation that occurred in Montgomery County, MD nearly three years ago. Winston Churchill High School principal Dr. Joan Benz was condemned in January of 2007 for commenting "Every incident revolving around this two month ordeal has been Black-on-Black violence" (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/05/AR2007010500676.html). Dr. Benz found herself in her own whirlwind based on her comments that were deemed by both parents and her own administration as racially insensitive. She was forced to apologize (http://www.wtop.com/?sid=1024771&nid=25) in a letter that read as if she herself just went through a reeducation camp.
When I first heard this story, I thought to myself "Is what Dr. Benz said true or false?" Her comments were either correct or incorrect. If she was correct, then she did nothing wrong; she simply pointed out a fact. If she was incorrect, then say she committed an act of libel. It seems to me her only "mistake" was making a statement that categorized individuals by race.
I am not privy to what goes on inside Montgomery County Public Schools, so I do not have the facts at hand. However, I am certain it would have been easy for someone inside MCPS to check the facts, but chances are the facts would have simply gotten in the way of a good argument. I read the news articles and all I saw was that, right or wrong, Dr. Benz stated a fact.
Does this mean we can no longer include race in any discussion? Should the CDC stop reporting mortality statistics by race? Can we no longer talk about health issues that may afflict one race more than another? I'm sorry, but the United States is not as color blind as some people would like it to be, and rightfully so.
I think people have become far too thin-skinned. I have two words I want to scream to everyone: "Grow up!" One of the problems of having freedom is that everyone is free. We cannot expect every words that comes from everyone's mouth to make us happy. That is reality. Deal with it. Sometimes I think we are surrounded by too many people with thick heads and thin skins. Making a legal case out of every slight is asinine. No wonder the legal system is so overloaded.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Very thoughtful Matthew.
ReplyDeleteThere is so much power in declaring offense to things thse days. Perhaps the impulse was borne of a real desire to redress wrongs of segregation, slavery and racism but it has gotten out of control.
Most of these issues ought to rightly be handled privately, and with two little words "I'm sorry." But now simply accusing someone of racism is so personally destructive. The stakes are really high, and it becomes the burden of the accused to prove a negative.
I don't know whether or not it's a prerogative of a magistrate to refuse to marry a couple for his/her own personal reasons. At least he was up front about his opinion and they were able to find someone else to perform the ceremony. While I'm sure his views were jarring and upsetting to the couple at hand, they were better off having someone who didn't oppose their union performing the ceremony.
While in many ways it was a surprising thing to hear of in a country where we just elected a bi-racial President, it could have been much more outrageous.