Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Preacher Nathan Knight, Apr 24, 2003.
Lets get some opinions supporting and opposing interracial relationships/marriage.
I see no reason whatsoever such relationships should be opposed.
I work in Minority Services on a college campus. I am White and my boss (female) and one co-worker (male) are both Black. My boss has been married to a White man for nearly 25 years. They have two children, one is about to finish his last year at Harvard. Their marriage seems to be a strong one and although they are married, they are both separate individuals who would have also done well on their own had they never married or found the "right one". They exhibit many qualities that I admire in a marriage.
Now, the downside, although my boss didn't grow up in this small midwestern town, I would guess that she would have had a lot harder time (as would her husband) if they had and chose to marry outside their own race. Although the town has become more "diverse" from having students of color from the campus, there are still many who discriminate or frown upon "mixed" marriages or mixed dating. While I do not personally have anything against it, I would certainly think twice before becoming romantically involved with a Black man (at least due to the area I live in if for no other reason).
Also, I believe that kids of these marriages often have a harder time fitting in to society. They are neither Black nor White, they are BOTH. Which race will they choose to date from? Will that date's parents accept the relationship if it progresses to marriage? One has to accept the fact that there will probably ALWAYS be a certain amount of discrimination when you date or marry outside your own race; and the more "different" your other half looks from you, the MORE stares you will get. That is a sad but simple truth that needs to be thought of BEFORE you jump into a relationship.
Just some thoughts...
The reality of it is that there may be some added stress on the relationship due to regional attitudes toward "interracial" marriage, but that is up to the couple to decide.
(There is one "race" - the human race. Within that race are various ethnic groups. Even the lines of ethnicities are very blurred. How many "white" people here on Baptist Board can claim a "pure" ethnic pedigree going back two generations?)
There is no biblical reason to be against interracial relationships. In fact, some of the most Godly folks in the Bible were in interracial relationships. Moses (Hebrew) and Zepporah (Cushite). Naomi's Israelite son and Moabite daughter-in-law.
But Paul says it best: “there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and bestows His riches upon all who call upon Him.” (Rom. 10:12)
Romans 10:12 says it perfectly. This matter should be closed for discussion as regards Biblical grounds. There is nothing whatsoever to make this even a matter, Biblically.
Discussion and pastoral counseling on the matter should surround the unique challenges that "interracial" couples might face from bigots in the world, and the natural difficulties that can often result within a marriage stemming from culturally-based differences. Also, to help equip certain "interracial" couples to equip their "interracial" children to navigate indentity formation issues unto becoming bi-cultural.
How many "white" people here on Baptist Board can claim a "pure" ethnic pedigree going back two generations?
Are you kidding? I can't do that going back ten generations!!
"How many "white" people here on Baptist Board can claim a "pure" ethnic pedigree going back two generations?"
I don't think anyone is trying to prove their own "pedigree" here; the question was what are the pros and cons of interacial relationships?
Each person has to decide this on their own. For me it would probably NOT be what I would choose.
[ May 26, 2003, 08:31 PM: Message edited by: 3907 ]
There is only one race. To speak of differing races within humanity is to accept the evolutionary hypothesis, and I for one reject that.
There is nothing in the Bible about inter-racial marriages. That is not an unequal yoke. A believer taking up with a non-believer, that is what is condemned in the Bible as an unequal yoke.
As a side note, it would be interesting to see this posted 40 or 50 years ago. I do think mankind is getting worse and worse, but on this it has improved.
[ May 26, 2003, 08:44 PM: Message edited by: 3907 ]
There is only one race. To speak of differing races within humanity is to accept the evolutionary hypothesis, and I for one reject that. </font>[/QUOTE]As an anthropologist, I am really encouraged to see this view expressed here.
In anthropology, there has been a debate raging since its inception in Britain in the 1800s over the concept of "race."
Generally, however, the side that has won has argued that the concept of "race" is a social construct stemming from the colonial era.
Colonial rulers, stemming much from Herbert Spence's A System of Synthetic Philosophy, constructed the concept of "race" within unilineal evolutionism's premises as a justification for their domination being "good" for their imported and dominated peoples. In sequence from lowest to highest, Blacks, indignous "Indians" and Aborignees, etc., were on a "lower" evolutionary "scale." Meztizos and mullatoes, because of their "mixed breeding," fell in between, while white Europeans, because they were the most "evolved," were "civilizing" those below them from the top.
Ironically, some of the strongest debunking among scholars of the concept of "races" stems from the evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould who, in his quite fascinating book The Mis-measure of Man gives powerful evidence that I will spare you but, in its conclusion, argues thus, and this is very close to his own words: that if a nuclear holocaust occurred tomorrow and if the only people who survived were one small people group in Papua New Guinea, given time, migration, and micro-evolutionary interactions with groups of human organisms with varying environments, the world would look the same today as far as peoples' physical features are concerned.
This theory is bolstered by the main of anthropology holding to an "out of Africa" genesis, though macro-evolutionary concept.
In other words, this affirms the above Biblical assertion in a roundabout way, though of course not completely, and we can accept the Biblical assertion based upon revealed revelation. There is no such thing as essentialistic "races." The concept of "race" was a colonial concept used to justify colonialist praxis. And while the concept of "race" may have existed prior, such as in ancient Rome, it is this European colonial construct that most still bears upon *our* consciousnesses today.
I say we debunk it in the Church once for all.
[ April 26, 2003, 04:08 AM: Message edited by: Anthro ]
That was probably the most interesting thing I've read in a great long while. Thank you Anthro...why don't we debunk it period...why limit our debunking to church? (Already practicing debunking this issue...as it isn't an issue to me)
Thank you, and Amen on the debunking it within larger society. I personally do at every chance I can within my professional and other realms, too.
At the same time, we need to debunk it, I think, within the Church FIRST, since the impossible-to get-away-from interaction and dialectic between religion and politics indicates that we can have a profound influence upon larger society by reason of us, the Church, antecedently carrying out such change within our societally-engaged microcosmic civil society groups (outward-looking churches who can model this for our larger world).
At the same time again, the concept of "race" has had historically negative impacts, and still does today, especially in realms outside of the U.S. (I am saying that racism is worse in other nations than it is in the U.S., especially among former--no surprise--European colonies).
Hence, we need to *loosely* hold on to the concept of "race" in SOME *discourse* so we can still *discuss* these historically-based matters and deal with them till they can be fully put in the grave-pit of history where they belong.
So perhaps we in the Church can work toward that, as is my deep hope. Tony Evans has argued helpfully along these lines.
Today in the U.S., I am pleased to see the issue of affirmative action on the Supreme Court's upcoming slate. In Florida, Jeb Bush's abolishing of affirmative action in education HAS worked well, though the top-down WAY he went about it was bad and alienated a lot of people. I am not ready to conclude that a Jeb-like plan would work well in all States, because I have not studied it out, and my experience is limited to living within only three U.S. States, none in the Deep South. But maybe so. I have problems with Affirmative Action on principle, anyway. At any rate, I hope to see the Court leave this matter to the States to decide.
[ April 26, 2003, 04:00 AM: Message edited by: Anthro ]
I have no problem with interracial relationships. The Bible has no problem with it and that is where I get my ideas of right and wrong. Any cultural bias I was exposed to growing up is part of the baggage I try to eliminate. I like nice people and I don't care what culture they grew up in. I don't like people who aren't nice and I don't care what culture they grew up in. The problem to me is that with the current methods of dealing with racism is that the emphasis is on my respecting the differences and that is just not going to happen. For example, I hate, dispise, can't stand, disrespect, and will not even listen to Rap music. I don't care how that makes me look, I don't care if someone thinks I am being racist, bigoted, or mean. I won't listen to it if someone wrote good solid Christian words and "rapped" them. I like jazz, R&B, and Motown. Another example is foods from other countries. I am not going to "ooh" and "aah" over foods that I dislike because to not do so makes me look disrespectful. I don't like Thai, Mexican, Indian, and many other ethnic foods. So what? My point is, I don't mind differences but I am not going to respect differences just because it would be politically incorrect to do so. Race is not a deal breaker with me but cultural differences might be.
Anyone I date is interracial because I am interracial.
People who have problems with mixed race babies need to get a grip. They are the real jerks.
I also have no problem with interracial relationships. I have a major problem with dating outside one's Christian faith!
Our 8 year old does not understand the term Black man, woman. He will say 'the new dark boy who came to Sunday School', or the red boy, meaning his red shirt. We've never pointed out or 'recognized' differences in people so he is still blind to racism.
I told one black boy in my AWANA class who told me he hates being black that we're all the same color! Under our skin, there is no black, white, yellow, brown and that the only difference in the amount of melanin we have in our skin. I told Trevor that Jesus was not white like me and he was so very shocked!
I LOVE this article written by the 18 year old daughter of Missionary Dr. Grady S. McMurtry
Full-time International Creation Emissary
Biblical Scientific Creationist
For example, I hate, dispise, can't stand, disrespect, and will not even listen to Rap music.
For what it's worth, being against rap music can't be a litmus test for racism, because the best rapper right now is white
I have no problem with interacial marriages or relationships. In fact, I've had several friends who were in these said relationships. However, I believe society will always have a certain stigma with a white man or woman marrying or dating a Black person. I've seen the same stigma with a white person marrying an Asian or other ethnic background. Bottom line is: if you cannot realistically see yourself being able to rise above the gossip and possible racist comments, then you should probably stick to your own ethnic group. I think society HAS made some progress on this issue, but it is far from being accepted everywhere.