Search? Click Here
Join the BUGS Team! Post on the internet along with us to fight White Genocide!

Anti-Miscegenation Laws and Why is There a Fifteenth Amendment?

Posted by Bob on July 16th, 2007 under History


On the whole subject of antimiscegenation law, I read practically nothing that is accurate, as I explained below about wikipedia’s “The Future District of Columbia.”

The following explains the status of blacks, including in the Quaker State, which someone said abandoned its anti-intermarriage law in 1790. In 1856 blacks were not allowed on trolleys in Philadelphia:

http://www.primaryresearch.org/bh/research/lauranzano/index.php

When I lived in Massachusetts, I read a book written in 1867 called “The History of Slavery in Massachusetts.” Pasted on the inside of the cover was an 1867 book review, written in 1867, bemoaning the fact that someone would dredge all this up JUST when they had the South by the throat to punish for slavery.

In that volume I had a living witness to the abolition of the MA anti-intermarriage law in ****1863****.

It was SCHOOL SEGREGATION that the abolitionists fought and THAT was abolished in 1843, the date given for the 1963 act abolishing antimiscegenation law. I read the argument for integration in 1842 in the 1960s in a book called “Documents of American History.” This was the 1960s, and every document relating to American history was, as the author stated, there to prove that abolitionists were1960s integrationists. Trivia like the Constitution was left out.

In the 1960s, we said that integration would lead to intermarriage. Modern Opinion in 1960 said that integration had NOTHING TO DO WITH INTERMARRIAGE. In 1967 the Supreme Court abolished all laws against intermarriage.

This is such a continuum today that everybody who talks about intermarriage laws ALWAYS confuses them with antislavery laws, integration, as in the case of our commenter, and so forth.

We have the same problem with the very EXISTENCE of the Fifteenth Amendment, giving blacks the right to vote. According to present interpretation, the “right” to vote, LIKE THE RIGHT TO INTERMARRY, WAS already included in the fourteenth amendment.

Why IS there a fifteenth amendment? Not only was it assumed that the fourteenth did not give blacks the vote, much less marry whites, but it was harder to cheat through the fifteenth amendment than it was the fourteenth, even with all the congressmen from the Old Confederacy denied their seats and votes.

NO ONE ever thinks about WHY, if the fourteenth amendment gave “equal rights” to blacks, the fifteenth amendment EXISTS,

These were critical distinctions to earlier generations, even to the Radical Republicans. When THEY ruled the South during Reconstruction, THEY enforced antimiscegenation laws. It never occurred to ANYBODY then that integration and, God knows, intermarriage, could not be outlawed by a STATE.

The bottom line is that Vermont almost certainly DID have an anti-intermarriage law, though they had almost no blacks. It is amazing that they FOUND a black slave for the state court to free in 1775, but slavery was on the books until then.

This was a lot of WORK. I get TIRED every time someone decides to go into this. No one knows ANY of the real history.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
  1. #1 by shari on 07/16/2007 - 3:56 pm

    Your right, not many know any history. I was 10yrs old in 1960, growing up in north central Mt. This SHOULD have been taught in grade school and of course it wasn’t. Those years are so prime for absorbing a lot quickly. And then so many went to college as sitting ducks, especially those who succeeded.

    But, the harvest is ripe and ready to be cut. I feel that nothing can happen fast enough.

  2. #2 by Simmons on 07/16/2007 - 5:26 pm

    Frankly speaking this is all fine and well worth knowing and any educated literate person would want to understand this. But in all reality this means very little to us, it would if we were a semi-respectable wanting to turn back the clock then we would have a reference point in which to navigate back to. But we whites are literally as a whole speaking in a collective sense bucket of rocks dumb, and I’m a person who loves his race and wants it to step up to the next level. By Burnham’s Management theories we here in the West have been managed down to the Eloi level. What we need to do is remove the spikes from the track, salvage the wreckage and start anew.

  3. #3 by shari on 07/16/2007 - 6:53 pm

    Maybe learning what we should, is part of salvaging and starting anew, at least for those not learning now. Being a collective bucket of rocks dumb will not be acceptable.

  4. #4 by Simmons on 07/16/2007 - 7:53 pm

    I have called for the Cracker-American Enlightenment, but as of now Oprah/WalMart/Stupidvision are winning out in the race. Still I’m pulling spikes where and when I can.

  5. #5 by mderpelding on 07/17/2007 - 6:19 pm

    Funny thing is, the same congress that ratified the 14th amendment also established racially segregated schools in D.C.

    Chief Justice Warren, who penned the majority opinion for Brown vs. Board of Education stated that “the Court could not be bound by the intentions of the people who lived in 1868”.

    In other words, the REAL intent of the 14th amendment was whatever the Court wanted it to be. As long as it was politically correct.

    So the Warren court sided with Brown. They threw out school desegregation, via the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment.
    Of course, the real intent of Brown was forced integration.
    All liberals understand this.

    Fast forward to today.

    The Roberts court cites “Brown” as the CONSTITUTIONAL precedent for their 5-4 decision in the Louisville and Seattle school cases.

    Race cannot be a deciding factor in school assignment.
    The Roberts court cites a literal interpretation of “Brown”.
    This confers conservative respectability on the Warren court’s blatantly unconstitutional decision for “Brown” back in 1954.

    Thanks to the Roberts court, mainstream political opposition to “Brown vs. Board of Education” is now off limits.

    Another Pyrrhic victory.

  6. #6 by shari on 07/17/2007 - 6:58 pm

    Equal rights is coming full circle. They can’t keep talking about “equality” while it’s becoming more and more obvious that whites are being discriminated against. They are losing “legitimacy.” I think that is the crack in the dam that this last court decision was trying to shore up. It won’t.

  7. #7 by Jakob on 07/24/2007 - 8:40 am

    [sprung]

    This is exactly what I expected to find out after reading the title Anti-Miscegenation Laws and Why is There a Fifteenth Amendment?. Thanks for informative article

You must be logged in to post a comment.