Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Mildred Loving, one half of the interracial couple who challenged a Virginia ban on miscegenation and struck an enormous blow for freedom and equality, has died at 68. Just imagine that a mere 40 years ago, a husband and wife could be woken up in the middle of the night by a county sheriff and arrested for the "crime" of having married the person they love and that person being of another race. That actually happened to them. The judge declared:
Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.
He sentenced the Lovings to a year in prison but offered to suspend the sentence if they'd leave the state of Virginia. Aided by the ACLU and the NAACP, they took their case all the way to the Supreme Court and won one of the grandest victories in legal history. Last year, on the 40th anniversary of that ruling, Mildred made a rare public statement in which she noted that her battle mirrors that of gays and lesbians today to marry the one they love. She said:
Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the "wrong kind of person" for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights.I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court
case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so
many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the
freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.
Mildred Loving inspired many with the courage and dignity she displayed in the face of hatred and oppression. Her voice, though heard rarely, carried a moral credibility that few can muster. She will be missed.
Comments
Technically, Ed, they were rousted from their bed closer to 50 years ago - it took more than nine years for their case to move through to the Supreme Court and to the ruling which came 40 years ago.
The Loving marriage spent more time in legal purgatory, waiting for the court cases to end, than it did in fully recognized legality - her husband was killed by a drunk driver eight years later.
It also points out that everyone can make a difference - the Lovings were at all connected to any power, and lived their entire lives around the poverty line. A thanks to the ACLU for taking their case is also warranted.
Posted by: jace | May 6, 2008 9:52 AM
Loving v. Virginia... what an incredibly apt name for the case.
Posted by: mph | May 6, 2008 10:39 AM
Ed,
Thanks for highlighting this, else I'd surely have missed it.
And thanks for quoting the judge's words and her words as a rejoinder to all those who say same-sex marriage is different than interracial marriage, and that God obviously didn't intend for same-sex couples to marry. As they unknowingly cite the judge, Mildred Loving's response is an eloquent rebuttal.
Posted by: James Hanley | May 6, 2008 11:03 AM
The mind reels. That was the 1960's... truly amazing.
Posted by: heddle | May 6, 2008 11:07 AM
Thanks to Loving and many others things have certainly changed. My Ethiopian wife and I hardly get the occassional glance and I'm never sure if it's becuse of our different "races" or because I'm 6'4" and she's 5'0".
There have been rude and bigoted people that have commented, both here and in Ethiopia, but they are the great exception.
Someday it will be the same for same sex couples, but first the laws need to change.
Posted by: Lance | May 6, 2008 11:46 AM
One of the local rags here in my new state of PA (which is even now flirting with a "Marriage Protection", i.e, anti-gay union ammendment to the state constitution) has a blog-like comment section in its online version of the letters to the editor.
I've engaged in some spirited discussions with opponents of gay unions and I've mentioned the Loving case many times.
Unfortuantely this doesn't seem to have much of an affect on them. "Aaaah, but that's different. You see, same-sex unions are contrary to the natural order."
Of course, no one can ever seem to define just what this "natural order" is. But it does seem to be founded on some vague notion of the potential for procreation - whether or not the intent to procreate is there.
I've pointed out that there was a time (and still is in some parts) that interracial marriage seemed to be just as contrary to the natural order as gay marriage does today. "Aaah, but revulsion at gay unions is so persistent and entrenched in human history that it must be a reflection of some deeper reality, not mere cultural whims." No one ever seems to think about the fact that anti-Semitism and belief in the paranormal are also persistent througout much of human history.
I guess this is a bit off topic to Loving, but I just wanted to share some of my epxeriences when confronting bigotry.
Posted by: ZacharySmith | May 6, 2008 12:46 PM
Hoorah for the Lovings and the massive amount of courage it must have taken to stand up for their belief, and in Virginia, no less. I would rather that hadn't had to suffer, but at least something good came out of it, this time.
And, Zachary, when ever somebody talks about "supporting the natural order," I usually ask them if they eat their tubers raw and sleep in trees.
Posted by: Mac | May 6, 2008 1:03 PM
Of course, Mildred Loving is wrong about any analogy of her struggles with the struggles of others for gay marriage.
Skin color is one thing, and genetic gayness is another. They are just different things, you know? Right, Ed? ;)
Posted by: Gingerbaker | May 6, 2008 3:07 PM
"The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
Seems like God could have done a better job of keeping the races apart. Throw in some big bodies of water, confuse the tongues of shipbuilders, stuff like that. This silly judge depicts a Homer Simpson god who strikes his forehead, shouting, "DOH!" as Europeans drag Africans to the New World.
Posted by: Robski | May 6, 2008 4:55 PM
Amazing what sort of illogic will be accepted, even by a judge, to get the answer desired.
By the same logic, Irishmen eating potatoes are committing a crime against nature.
Posted by: Matthew L. | May 6, 2008 5:10 PM
What brave people Mr. and Mrs. Loving were and what great examples of Americans being true patriots by defending American's founding ideals in spite of those ideals being at times horrendously applied by our government and its people. A great American hero is gone, with barely a mention in the MSM.
I have continued to follow Ed's lead in using their case as a challenge to conservatives hypocritically claiming they support liberty rights while practicing the suppresion of liberty against those they wish would just go away. Ask a conservative this week if Loving v. VA is an "activist" decision with the court acting improperly acting as "super legislators" and watch them squirm.
Posted by: Michael Heath | May 6, 2008 8:49 PM
A couple of documentaries about a black woman and white women who were ahead of their time, this time during the Spanish Civil War.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em1uvodA1t0
Here is one on Josephine Baker, "The First Black Superstar".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8M6vSZMB2U&feature=PlayList&p=9DE297A85FF5D134&index=0
This should be seen by all American students.
Posted by: bernarda | May 7, 2008 4:34 AM