Misplaced Pages

Latest revision as of 18:31, 4 December 2024

Part of a series on
Discrimination
Forms Institutional Structural Statistical Taste-based
Attributes Age Caste Class Dialect Disability Genetic Hair texture Height Language Looks Mental disorder Race / Ethnicity Skin color Scientific racism Rank Sex Sexual orientation Species Size Viewpoint
Social Arophobia Acephobia Adultism Anti-albinism Anti-autism Anti-homelessness Anti-drug addicts Anti-intellectualism Anti-intersex Anti-left handedness Anti-Masonry Aporophobia Audism Biphobia Clannism Elitism Ephebiphobia Health mental in poverty Fatphobia Gayphobia Gerontophobia Heterosexism HIV/AIDS stigma Homophobia In-group Leprosy stigma Lesbophobia Discrimination against men Misandry Misogyny Nepotism Outgroup Pedophobia Perpetual foreigner Pregnancy Sectarianism Supremacism Aryanism Autistic Black Chauvinism Female Illusory Jewish Male Nordicism Tigraynization Ultranationalism White Transphobia 21st-century anti-trans movement in the United Kingdom Non-binary Transmisogyny Trans men Vegaphobia Xenophobia
Religious Atheism Exclusivism Baháʼí Faith Buddhism Christianity Persecution Catholicism Eastern Orthodoxy Jehovah's Witnesses LDS or Mormon Protestantism Tewahedo Orthodoxy post–Cold War era Falun Gong Hinduism Persecution Untouchability Islam Persecution Ahmadiyya Shi'ism Sufism Sunnism minority Muslim Judaism Persecution Neopaganism Rastafari Sikhism Yazidism Zoroastrianism
Ethnic/national Afghan African Albanian Arab Armenian Asian France South Africa United States Assyrian Australian Austrian Azerbaijani Black people African Americans China South Africa Bengali Bulgarian Catalan Chechen Chinese Colombian Croat Dutch English Estonian Filipino French Fulani Finnish Georgian German Greek Haitian Hazara Hungarian Igbo Indian Indigenous people Australia Canada United States Iranian Irish Italian Japanese Jewish Eliminationist New Religious Anti-Yiddish Zionist Korean Kurdish Lithuanian Malay Māori Mexican Middle Eastern Mongolian Montenegrin Nigerian Pakistani Palestinians Pashtun Polish Portuguese Quebec Romani Romanian Russian Scottish Serb Slavic Somali Spanish Tatar Thai Turkish Ukrainian Uyghur Venezuelan Vietnamese Welsh
Manifestations Anti-LGBTQ rhetoric SPLC-designated list of anti-LGBTQ hate groups Anti-LGBTQ movement in the US Anti-trans movement in the UK Blood libel Bullying Cancel culture Capital punishment for homosexuality Compulsory sterilization Corrective rape Counter-jihad Cultural genocide Defamation Democide Dog whistle Domicide Economic Education Employment Eliminationism Eliminationist antisemitism Enemy of the people Ethnic cleansing Ethnic conflict Ethnic hatred Ethnic joke Ethnocide Excellence Gender-based dress codes Cosmetics policy High heel policy Forced conversion Freak show Gay bashing Gendercide Transgender genocide Genital modification and mutilation Circumcision Female genital mutilation Intersex medical interventions Genocide examples Glass ceiling Hate crime Disability hate crime Violence against LGBTQ people Violence against transgender people Hate group Hate speech Homeless dumping Housing Indian rolling Kill Haole Day Lavender scare LGBTQ+ grooming conspiracy theory Linguicide Lynching Mortgage Murder music Native American mascots Occupational segregation Opposition to immigration Paper genocide Persecution Pogrom Political repression Purge Racialization Religious persecution Religious terrorism Religious violence Religious war Scapegoating Segregation academy Sentencing disparity Sexual harassment Sex-selective abortion Slut-shaming Untermensch Trans bashing Victimisation Violence against women White flight White genocide conspiracy theory Wife selling Witch hunt
Policies Age of candidacy Blood purity Blood quantum Crime of apartheid Disabilities Catholic Jewish Gender pay gap Gender roles Transphobia in the US House of Representatives Gerontocracy Gerrymandering Ghetto benches Internment Jewish quota Law for Protection of the Nation LGBTQ rights opposition MSM blood donation restrictions No kid zone Numerus clausus (as religious or racial quota) One-drop rule Racial quota Racial segregation Jim Crow laws Nuremberg Laws Racial steering Redlining Same-sex marriage (laws and issues prohibiting) Segregation age racial religious sexual Social exclusion Sodomy law State atheism State religion Ugly law Voter suppression
Countermeasures Affirmative action Anti-discrimination law Anti-racism Constitutional colorblindness Cultural assimilation Cultural pluralism Diversity, equity, and inclusion Diversity training Empowerment Fat acceptance movement Feminism Fighting Discrimination Hate speech laws by country Human rights Intersex human rights LGBT rights Nonviolence Racial integration Reappropriation Self-determination Social integration Toleration
Related topics Allophilia Amatonormativity Anti-Zionism Bias Cisnormativity Civil liberties Criminalization of homosexuality Dehumanization Diversity Multiculturalism Neurodiversity Ethnic penalty Figleaf Gender-blind Heteronormativity Historical eugenics Internalized oppression Intersectionality Masculism Medical model of disability autism Net bias Oikophobia Oppression Police brutality Political correctness Polyculturalism Power distance Prejudice Prisoner abuse Racial bias in criminal news in the United States Racism by country Racial color blindness Religious intolerance Reverse discrimination Reverse racism Second-generation gender bias Snobbery Social equity Social exclusion Social identity threat Social model of disability Social privilege Christian male white Social stigma Speciesism Stereotype threat The talk
v t e

Anti-miscegenation laws are laws that enforce racial segregation at the level of marriage and intimate relationships by criminalizing interracial marriage sometimes, also criminalizing sex between members of different races.

In the United States, interracial marriage, cohabitation and sex have been termed "miscegenation" since the term was coined in 1863. Contemporary usage of the term is infrequent, except in reference to historical laws which banned the practice. Anti-miscegenation laws were first introduced in North America by the governments of several of the Thirteen Colonies from the late seventeenth century onward, and subsequently, they were introduced by the governments of many U.S. states and U.S. territories and they remained in force in many US states until 1967. After the Second World War, an increasing number of states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws. In 1967, in the landmark case Loving v. Virginia, the remaining anti-miscegenation laws were ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren.

Anti-miscegenation laws were also enforced in Nazi Germany as a part of the Nuremberg Laws which were passed in 1935, and they were also enforced in South Africa as a part of the system of apartheid which was introduced in 1948.

United States

Sex and the law
Social issues
Consent Reproductive rights Homophobia (Criminalization · Capital punishment) LGBTQ rights (Conversion therapy · Decriminalization · Civil union · Same-sex marriage · Adoption · Intersex · Transgender) Age of consent Marriageable age Pedophile advocacy Deviant sexual intercourse Miscegenation Norms Public morality Antisexualism Ethics Objectification Pornography Laws Prostitution law Red-light district Reproductive rights Right to sexuality Sex industry (Workers' rights · Decriminalization · World Charter) Survival sex Bodily integrity Circumcision
Specific offences (varies by jurisdiction)
Adultery Laws Anti-miscegenation U.S. laws Bestiality Child grooming Child pornography Laws Child prostitution Criminal transmission of HIV Cybersex trafficking Female genital mutilation Forcible touching Fornication Incest Obscenity U.S. law Pimping Prostitution forced procuring Public indecency Rape statutory marital Revenge porn Seduction Sex trafficking Sexting Sexual abuse child Sexual assault Sexual harassment Slavery Sodomy U.S. laws Female sodomy UK Section 63 (2008) Violence Trafficking Voyeurism
Sex offender registration
Sex offender registry Sex offender registries in the United States
Portals
Human sexuality portal Law portal
v t e

The first ever anti-miscegenation law was passed by the Maryland General Assembly in 1691, criminalizing interracial marriage. In a speech in Charleston, Illinois, in 1858, Abraham Lincoln stated, "I am not, nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people". By the late 1800s, 38 U.S. states had anti-miscegenation statutes. By 1924, the ban on interracial marriage was still in force in 29 states. While interracial marriage had been legal in California since 1948, in 1957 actor Sammy Davis Jr. faced backlash for his relationship with a white woman, actress Kim Novak. In 1958, Davis briefly married a black woman, actress and dancer Loray White, to protect himself from mob violence.

In 1958, officers in Virginia entered the home of Richard and Mildred Loving and dragged them out of bed for living together as an interracial couple, on the basis that "any white person intermarry with a colored person"— or vice versa—each party "shall be guilty of a felony" and face prison terms of five years. When former president Harry S. Truman was asked by a reporter in 1963 if interracial marriage would become widespread in the U.S., he responded, "I hope not; I don’t believe in it", before adding "Would you want your daughter to marry a Negro? She won't love someone who isn't her color." In 1967 the law banning interracial marriage was ruled unconstitutional (via the 14th Amendment adopted in 1868) by the U.S. Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia. Many states refused to adapt their laws to this ruling with Alabama in 2000 being the last US state to remove anti-miscegenation language from the state constitution. Even with many states having repealed the laws and with the state laws becoming unenforceable, in the United States in 1980 only 2% of marriages were interracial.

Anti-miscegenation is a part of American domestic terrorist ideology; the Phineas Priesthood, considered by the New York's Anti-Defamation_League of B'nai B'rith to be more an ideology without organizational structure, opposed interracial marriage. The name is a reference to the Old Testament priest Phineas who, according to the Bible, murdered an Israelite man as he lay with a Midianite woman.

South Africa

Early prohibitions on interracial marriages date back to the rule of the Dutch East India Company when High Commissioner Van Rheede prohibited marriages between European settlers and heelslag or full-blooded slave women (that is, of pure Asian or African origin) in 1685. The ban was never enforced.

In 1905, German South West Africa banned the "Rassenmischehe" (racial mixed marriage). These bans had no legal basis in German citizenship laws (issued in 1870 and 1913) and the "decrees issued by either a colonial governor or the colonial secretary", they were "not laws that had received the approval of the Reichstag". Similar such laws were also adopted in the German colonies of German East Africa (1906) and German Samoa (1912).

In 1927, the Pact coalition government passed a law prohibiting marriages between whites and blacks (though not between whites and "coloured" people). An attempt was made to extend this ban in 1936 to marriages between whites and coloureds when a bill was introduced in parliament, but a commission of inquiry recommended against it.

South Africa's Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, passed in 1949 under apartheid, forbade marriages between whites and anyone who was deemed to be non-whites. The Population Registration Act (No. 30) of 1950 provided the basis for separating the population of South Africa into different races. Under the terms of this act, all residents of South Africa were to be classified as either a native "white" South African, a "black" immigrant (these typically originating from Bantu lands across the border to the north), or a "colored" person of visibly mixed race parentage. Indians were included under the category "Asian" in 1959. Also in 1950, the Immorality Act was passed, which criminalized all sexual relations between whites and non-whites. The Immorality Act of 1950 extended an earlier ban on sexual relations between whites and blacks (the Immorality Act of 1927) to a ban on sexual relations between whites and any non-whites. Both Acts were repealed in 1985 as a part of the reforms which were carried out during the tenure of P. W. Botha.

Australia

In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, so-called Half-Caste Acts in the Northern Territory, Western Australia and Queensland regulated marriage between indigenous and non-indigenous adults, often requiring permission from an official to marry. Officials were concerned with controlling relations between indigenous women and Chinese fishermen and pearl divers. From the mid-1930s there was a shift to control who Aboriginal peoples could marry, in order to promote assimilation, until 1961 when the federal Marriage Act removed all restrictions.

Asia

China

Laws and policies which discouraged miscegenation were passed during the rule of various dynasties, including an 836 AD decree which forbade Chinese people from having relationships with members of other people groups such as Iranians, Africans, Arabs, Indians, Malays, Sumatrans, and so on.

India

While there are no specific provisions regarding the freedom to marry someone who is a member of a different race in the Constitution of India, Article 21 of the Constitution, which is a Fundamental Right, is widely regarded as to provide that freedom as it comes under "personal liberty", which the Constitution guarantees to protect.

After the events of the Indian Rebellion of 1857, several anti-miscegenation laws were passed by the British colonial government.

North Korea

After the deterioration of relations between North Korea and the Soviet Union in the 1960s, North Korea began to enact practices such as forcing its male citizens who had married Eastern European women to divorce them.

Additionally, the North Korean government has been accused of performing forced abortions and infanticides on repatriated defectors to "prevent the survival of half-Chinese babies".

Europe

Nazi Germany

The U.S. was the global leader of countries where codified racism was practiced, and its race laws fascinated the Nazis. The National Socialist Handbook for Law and Legislation of 1934–1935, edited by the lawyer Hans Frank, contains a pivotal essay by Herbert Kier on the recommendations for race legislation which devoted a quarter of its pages to U.S. legislation—from segregation, race based citizenship, immigration regulations, and anti-miscegenation. The Nazis enacted miscegenation statutes which discriminated against Jews, Roma and Sinti ("Gypsies"), and Black people. The Nazis considered the Jews to be a race supposedly bound by close genetic (blood) ties to form a unit which one could neither join nor secede from, rather than a religious group of people. The influence of Jews had been declared to have detrimental impact on Germany, in order to justify the discrimination and persecutions of Jews. To be spared, one had to prove one's Aryan descent, normally by obtaining an Aryan certificate.

Jews, Romani and Black people

Although Nazi doctrine stressed the importance of physiognomy and genes in determining race, in practice, race was only determined through the religions which were followed by each individual's ancestors. Individuals were considered non-'Aryan' (i.e. Jewish) if at least three of four of their grandparents had been enrolled as members of a Jewish congregation; it did not matter if those grandparents had been born to a Jewish mother or had converted to Judaism. The actual religious beliefs of the individual himself or herself were also immaterial, as was the individual's status under halakhic law.

An anti-miscegenation law was enacted by the Nazi government in September 1935 as a part of the Nuremberg Laws. The Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honour ('Gesetz zum Schutze des deutschen Blutes und der deutschen Ehre'), enacted on 15 September 1935, forbade sexual relations and marriages between Germans classified as so-called 'Aryans' and Germans classified as Jews. This applied also to marriages concluded in Germany with only one spouse of German citizenship. On 26 November 1935, the law was extended to include, "Gypsies, Negroes or their bastard offspring". Such extramarital intercourse was marked as Rassenschande ("race defilement") and could be punished by imprisonment — later usually followed by the deportation to a concentration camp, often entailing the inmate's death. Germans of African and other non-European descent were classified following their own origin or the origin of their parents. Sinti and Roma ("Gypsies") were mostly categorised following police records, e.g. mentioning them or their forefathers as Gypsies, when having been met by the police as travelling peddlers.

The existing 20,454 (as of 1939) marriages between persons racially regarded as so-called 'Aryans' and non-Aryans — called mixed marriages (German: Mischehe) — would continue. However, the government eased the conditions for the divorce of mixed marriages. In the beginning the Nazi authorities hoped to make the 'Aryan' partner get a divorce from their non-Aryan-classified spouses, by granting easy legal divorce procedures and opportunities for the 'Aryan' spouse to withhold most of the common property after a divorce. Those who stuck to their spouse would suffer discriminations like dismissal from public employment, exclusion from civic society organisations, etc.

Any children — whenever born — within a mixed marriage, as well as children from extramarital mixed relationships born until 31 July 1936, were discriminated against as Mischlinge. However, children later born to mixed parents, not yet married at passing the Nuremberg Laws, were to be discriminated against as Geltungsjuden, regardless if the parents had meanwhile married abroad or remained unmarried. Any children who were enrolled in a Jewish congregation were also subject to discrimination as Geltungsjuden.

According to the Nazi family value attitude, the husband was regarded the head of a family. Thus people living in a mixed marriage were treated differently according to the sex of the 'Aryan' spouse and according to the religious affiliation of the children, their being or not being enrolled with a Jewish congregation. Nazi-termed mixed marriages were often not interfaith marriages, because in many cases the classification of one spouse as non-Aryan was only due to her or his grandparents being enrolled with a Jewish congregation or else classified as non-Aryan. In many cases both spouses had a common faith, either because the parents had already converted or because at marrying one spouse converted to the religion of the second (marital conversion). Traditionally the wife used to be the convert. However, in urban areas and after 1900, actual interfaith marriages occurred more often, with interfaith marriages legally allowed in some states of the German Confederation since 1847, and generally since 1875, when civil marriage became an obligatory prerequisite for any religious marriage ceremony throughout the united Germany.

Most mixed marriages occurred with one spouse being considered as non-Aryan, due to his or her Jewish descent. Many special regulations were developed for such couples. A differentiation of privileged and other mixed marriages emerged on 28 December 1938, when Hermann Göring discretionarily ordered this in a letter to the Reich's Ministry of the Interior. The "Gesetz über die Mietverhältnisse mit Juden" (English: Law on Tenancies with Jews) of 30 April 1939, allowing proprietors to unconditionally cancel tenancy contracts with Germans classified as Jews, thus forcing them to move into houses reserved for them, for the first time enacted Göring's creation. The law defined privileged mixed marriages and exempted them from the act.

The legal definitions decreed that the marriage of a Gentile husband and his wife, being a Jewess or being classified as a Jewess due to her descent, was generally considered to be a privileged mixed marriage, unless they had children who were enrolled in a Jewish congregation. Then the husband was obviously not the dominant part in the family and the wife had to wear the yellow badge and the children as well, who were thus discriminated against as Geltungsjuden. Without children, or with children not enrolled with a Jewish congregation, the Jewish-classified wife was spared from wearing the yellow badge (else compulsory for Germans classified as Jews as of 1 September 1941).

In the opposite case, when the wife was classified as a so-called 'Aryan' and the husband as a Jew, the husband had to wear the yellow badge, if they had no children or children enrolled with a Jewish congregation. In case they had common children not enrolled in a Jewish congregation (irreligionist, Christian etc.) they were discriminated as Mischlinge and their father was spared from wearing the yellow badge.

Since there was no elaborate regulation, the practice of exempting privileged mixed marriages from anti-Semitic invidiousnesses varied amongst Greater Germany's different Reichsgaue. However, all discriminations enacted until 28 December 1938, remained valid without exemptions for privileged mixed marriages. In the Reichsgau Hamburg, for example, Jewish-classified spouses living in privileged mixed marriages received equal food rations like Aryan-classified Germans. In many other Reichsgaue they received shortened rations. In some Reichsgaue in 1942 and 1943, privileged mixed couples, and their minor children whose father was classified as a Jew, were forced to move into houses reserved for Jews only; this effectively made a privileged mixed marriage one where the husband was the one classified as so-called 'Aryan'.

The inconsistent application of privileged mixed marriages led to different compulsions to forced labour in 1940: Sometimes it was ordered for all Jewish-classified spouses, sometimes for Jewish-classified husbands, sometimes exempting Jewish-classified wives taking care of minor children. No document or law indicated the exemption of a mixed marriage from some persecutions and especially of its Jewish-classified spouse. Thus if arrested, non-arrested relatives or friends had to prove their exemption status, hopefully fast enough to rescue the arrested from any deportation.

Systematic deportations of Jewish Germans and Gentile Germans of Jewish descent started on 18 October 1941. German Jews and German Gentiles of Jewish descent living in mixed marriage were in fact mostly spared from deportation. In case a mixed marriage ended by death of the 'Aryan' spouse or divorce, the Jewish-classified spouse residing within Germany was usually deported soon after, unless the couple still had minor children not counting as Geltungsjuden.

In March 1943, an attempt to deport the Berlin-based Jews and Gentiles of Jewish descent living in non-privileged mixed marriages, failed due to public protest by their relatives-in-law of 'Aryan kinship' (see Rosenstrasse protest). Also, the Aryan-classified husbands and Mischling-classified children (starting at the age of 16) from mixed marriages were taken by the Organisation Todt for forced labour, starting in autumn 1944.

A last attempt, undertaken in February/March 1945 ended, because the extermination camps already were liberated. However, 2,600 from all areas of the Reich, not yet captured by the Allies, were deported to Theresienstadt, of whom most survived the last months until their liberation.

With the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 the laws banning mixed marriages were lifted again. Marriage dates could be backdated, if so desired, for couples who lived together unmarried during the Nazi era due to the legal restrictions, upon marrying after the war. Even if one spouse was already dead, the marriage could be retroactively recognised, in order to legitimise any children and enable them or the surviving spouse to inherit from their late father or partner, respectively. In the West German Federal Republic of Germany 1,823 couples applied for recognition (until 1963), which was granted in 1,255 cases.

France

In 1723, 1724 and 1774 several administrative acts forbade interracial marriages, mainly in colonies, although it is not clear if these acts were lawful. On 2 May 1746, the Parlement de Paris validated an interracial marriage.

Under King Louis XVI, the order of the Conseil du Roi of 5 April 1778, signed by Antoine de Sartine, forbade "whites of either sex to contract marriage with blacks, mulattos or other people of color" in the Kingdom, as the number of blacks had increased so much in France, mostly in the capital. Nevertheless, it was an interracial marriage prohibition, not an interracial sex prohibition. Moreover, it was an administrative act, not a law. There was never any racial law about marriage in France, with the exception of French Louisiana. But some restricted rules were applied about heritage and nobility. In any case, nobles needed the King's authorization for their marriage.

On 20 September 1792, all restrictions regarding interracial marriage were repealed by the Revolutionary government. On 8 January 1803, a Napoleonic governmental circular forbade marriages between white males and black women, or black men and white women, although the 1804 Napoleonic code did not mention anything specific about interracial marriage. In 1806, a French court validated an interracial marriage. In 1818, the highest French court (cour de cassation) validated a marriage contracted in New York between a white man and a colored woman. All administrative prohibitions were canceled by a law in 1833.

Italy

After the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the late 5th century, the Ostrogoths under the Theodoric the Great established the Ostrogothic Kingdom at Ravenna, ruling Italy as a dominant minority. In order to prevent the Romanization of his people, Theodoric forbade intermarriage between Goths and Romans. Theodoric's effort to separate Goths and Romans was however not successful, as intermarriages and assimilation were common. The Rugii, a Germanic tribe which supported Theodoric while preserving its independence within the Ostrogothic Kingdom, avoided intermarriage with Goths and other tribes in order to maintain administrative control.

After the publication of the Charter of Race in Fascist Italy, laws prohibiting marriage between Italians and non-Europeans were passed in Italy and its colonies. A Grand Council's resolution reiterated the prohibition of marriage between Italians and people belonging to "Hamitic, Semitic, and other non-Aryan races"; it established also a ban on marriage between public servants and foreigners. A list made in summer 1938 classified Negroes, Arabs and Berbers, Mongolians, Indians, Armenians, Turks, Yemenites, Palestinians as non-Aryans.

An analogous legislation was adopted in 1942 in the fascist Republic of San Marino.

Pre-Islamic Iberia

After the fall of the Western Roman Empire in the late 5th century, the Visigoths established the Visigothic Kingdom in Iberia, ruling the peninsula as a dominant minority. The Visigoths were subjected to their own legal code, and were forbidden from intermarrying with indigenous Iberians. This law was abolished in the end of the 6th century however, and by that time so many intermarriages had occurred that any reality of a biologically-linked Visigothic identity were "visibly crumbling", in the words of Gavin Langmuir. The Visigothic nobles and princes married Hispano-Romans and converted to Nicean Christianity, and the connection between Visigoths, their religion and royal authority became obscure.

British colonies

In 1909, the British Colonial Office published a circular known as the "Concubine Circular", officially denouncing officials who kept native mistresses, accusing them of "lowering" themselves in the eyes of the native population. Some colonial officials such as Hugh Clifford, in his 1898 novel Since the Beginning: A tale of an Eastern Land, attempted to defend their relationships with native women as being purely physical, while their relationship with a white wife was "purer". The 1909 circular was part of a wider British movement to maintain an "imperial race" kept at a distance from the native population. However, these efforts did not amount to a rigorous effort to eradicate such practices due to the large number of officials who engaged in such relationships.

See also

• Amalgamation (history)
• Endogamy
• History of Bob Jones University
• Historical race concepts
• Hypodescent
• Judicial aspects of race in the United States
• Loving Day
• Mixed Race Day
• One drop rule
• Race of the future
• Racial hygiene
• Scientific racism
• Social interpretations of race

References

1. "Loving v. Virginia". Oyez. Retrieved 2019-10-03.
2. "Loving v. Virginia". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2019-10-03.
3. ^ "Eugenics, Race, and Marriage". Facing History.org. Retrieved February 23, 2021.
4. Douglas, Stephen A. (1991). The Complete Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858. University of Chicago Press. p. 235.
5. ^ Lanzendorfer, Joy (August 9, 2017) "Hollywood Loved Sammy Davis Jr. Until He Dated a White Movie Star", Smithsonian Retrieved February 23, 2021.
6. "Truman Opposes Biracial Marriage", New York Times, 12 September 1963, quoted in: Wallenstein, Peter (2004). Tell the Court I Love My Wife: Race, Marriage, and Law--An American History. St. Martin's Publishing Group. p. 185.
7. Sengupta, Somini (November 12, 2000). "November 5–11; Marry at Will". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 21, 2009. Retrieved May 27, 2009. The margin by which the measure passed was itself a statement. A clear majority, 60 percent, voted to remove the miscegenation statute from the state constitution, but 40 percent of Alabamans – nearly 526,000 people – voted to keep it.
8. "Table 1. Race of Wife by Race of Husband: 1960, 1970, 1980, 1991, and 1992". census.gov. U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1994-07-05. Archived from the original on 2017-03-04. Retrieved 2017-02-20.
9. Giliomee, Hermann (2009). The Afikaners: Biography of a People (2nd ed.). Tafelberg. p. 19. ISBN 978-0-624-04823-7.
10. Wildenthal, Lora (2001). German Women for Empire, 1884-1945 (1st ed.). Duke UP. pp. 84–5. ISBN 978-0-8223-2819-3.
11. Giliomee, Hermann (2009). The Afikaners: Biography of a People (2nd ed.). Tafelberg. p. 344. ISBN 978-0-624-04823-7.
12. Rita M. Byrnes, ed. (1996), "Legislative Implementation of Apartheid", South Africa: A Country Study, Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, retrieved 2008-01-04
13. Parliament of Australia. "History of Marriage Laws in Australia" (PDF). aph.gov.
14. Ellinghaus, K. (2003). "Absorbing the 'Aboriginal problem': controlling interracial marriage in Australia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries". Aboriginal History. 27: 183-207.
15. Verass, Sophie. "Illegal love: Is this NT couple Australia's Richard and Mildred Loving". Special Broadcasting Service.
16. Gernet, Jacques (1996), A History of Chinese Civilization (2 ed.), Cambridge University Press, p. 294, ISBN 978-0-521-49781-7
17. Gupta, Shivani (February 14, 2015). "MARRIAGE IN INDIA". lawctopus.com. Retrieved May 18, 2020.
18. Beckman, Karen Redrobe (2003), Vanishing Women: Magic, Film, and Feminism, Duke University Press, pp. 31–3, ISBN 0-8223-3074-1
19. Kent, Eliza F. (2004), Converting Women, Oxford University Press US, pp. 85–6, ISBN 0-19-516507-1
20. Andrei Lankov, The Real North Korea: Life and politics in the failed Stalinist utopia (Oxford 2015) page 20
21. "BBC NEWS - Asia-Pacific - N Korea 'kills detainees' babies'". 22 October 2003. Retrieved 7 October 2014.
22. ^ Whitman, James Q. (2017). Hitler's American Model: The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law. Princeton University Press. pp. 37–43.
23. Diemut Majer (2003). "Non-Germans" under the Third Reich. Texas Tech University Press in association with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. p. 102. ISBN 978-0-89672-837-0.
24. S. H. Milton (2001). ""Gypsies" as social outsiders in Nazi Germany". In Robert Gellately and Nathan Stoltzfus (ed.). Social Outsiders in Nazi Germany. Princeton University Press. pp. 216, 231. ISBN 9780691086842.
25. Michael Burleigh (7 November 1991). The Racial State: Germany 1933-1945. Cambridge University Press. p. 49. ISBN 978-0-521-39802-2.
26. "The Nuremberg Race Laws". Archived from the original on 19 May 2014. Retrieved 1 May 2016.
27. Beate Meyer, Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der Hamburger Juden 1933–1945, Landeszentrale für politische Bildung (ed.), Hamburg: Landeszentrale für politische Bildung, 2006, p. 80. ISBN 3-929728-85-0
28. Before 1933 the term Mischehe referred to interfaith marriages, which was a tax office phenomenon. German tax offices deducted church tax from taxpayers, enrolled with a religious body, with the general tax collection by a surcharge on the income tax and then transferred it to the respective religious body. Interfaith mixed marriages, who were taxed as a unit, would have the charged church tax halved among the two respective religious bodies. Mostly the Roman Catholic Church, the respective Protestant regional church bodies and the Jewish congregations (in their case ending by Nazi act in March 1938) collected contributions from their members by way of church tax. Since the Nazis gave the term Mischehe a new meaning the tax offices were ordered to change their terminology to konfessionsverschiedene Ehe (English: denominationally different marriage). Cf. Cornelia Schmitz-Berning, Vokabular des Nationalsozialismus, Berlin et al.: de Gruyter, 1998, p. 409. ISBN 3-11-013379-2
29. By the "Gesetz zur Vereinheitlichung des Rechts der Eheschließung und der Ehescheidung (EheG)" ("Act on standardisation of the law of contraction and divorce of marriages", as of 6 July 1938) divorce on so-called racial grounds was enabled. Cf. Reichsgesetzblatt (RGBl., i.e. the Reich's law gazette) 1938 I, p. 807, § 37 EheG (Bedeutungsirrtum), cf. also Alexandra Przyrembel, "Rassenschande": Reinheitsmythos und Vernichtungslegitimation im Nationalsozialismus, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003, (Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geschichte; vol. 190), p. 86 (ISBN 3-525-35188-7) or — as to contesting or dissolving a marriage — see Bernhard Müller, Alltag im Zivilisationsbruch: Das Ausnahme-Unrecht gegen die jüdische Bevölkerung in Deutschland 1933–1945; eine rechtstatsächliche Untersuchung des Sonderrechts und seiner Folgewirkungen auf den "Alltag" der Deutschen jüdischer Abstammung und jüdischen Bekenntnisses, Munich: Allitera-Verlag, 2003, simultaneously Bielefeld, Univ., Diss., 2002, pp. 344–348. ISBN 3-935877-68-4
30. Based on an evaluation of divorce decrees, however restricted to only one former Reichsgau, the discriminations and easements caused a divorce rate of mixed marriages 20% above the general average. Many divorces followed after the couple succeeded in achieving a visa and thus emigration for the Jewish-classified spouse, so the divorce would lift the discriminations hitting the 'Aryan'-classified spouse, who stayed at home. Cf. Beate Meyer, 'Jüdische Mischlinge' — Rassenpolitik und Verfolgungserfahrung 1933–1945 (1999), Hamburg: Dölling und Galitz, (2002), (Studien zur jüdischen Geschichte; vol. 6), simultaneously Hamburg, Univ., Diss., 1998, ISBN 3-933374-22-7
31. This was maintained by the pre-1939 practice of Jewish congregations in Germany, which denied Jewesses who married Gentiles, to be precise non-converts to Judaism, to keep their membership in a congregation. This turned the Jewesses, if they did not convert to another faith, legally into irreligionists. On the other hand, Jews marrying Gentile women could (stay) enroll(ed) as member of a Jewish congregation.
32. Beate Meyer, "Geschichte im Film. Judenverfolgung, Mischehen und der Protest in der Rosenstraße 1943", in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. 52 (2004), pp. 23–36, footnote 23 on p. 28. ISSN 0044-2828. Some historians judge this intervention of Göring as a tactical measure, in order not to arouse protests by so-called 'Aryan' kinship, since after secret service reports the government organised November Pogrom in 1938 the regime did not feel so safe about the public's opinion on further anti-Semitic discriminations. Cf. Ursula Büttner, "Die Verfolgung der christlich-jüdischen 'Mischfamilien'", in: Ursula Büttner, Die Not der Juden teilen. Christlich-jüdische Familien im Dritten Reich. Beispiel und Zeugnis des Schriftstellers Robert Brendel, Hamburg: Christians, 1988, p. 44. ISBN 3-7672-1055-X
33. Cf. Reichsgesetzblatt (RGBl., i.e. the Reich's law gazette) 1939 I, 864 § 7 law text
34. ^ Beate Meyer, Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der Hamburger Juden 1933–1945, Landeszentrale für politische Bildung (ed.), Hamburg: Landeszentrale für politische Bildung, 2006, p. 83. ISBN 3-929728-85-0
35. Meldungen aus dem Reich: Auswahl aus den geheimen Lageberichten des Sicherheitsdienstes der SS 1939–1944 (1965; Reports from the Reich: Selection from the secret reviews of the situation of the SS 1939–1944; 1984 extended to 14 vols.), Heinz Boberach (ed. and compilator), Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag (dtv), 1968, (dtv-dokumente; vol. 477) p. 208. ISBN B0000BSLXR
36. The earlier deportations of Jews and Gentiles of Jewish descent from Austria and Pomerania Province (both to occupied Poland) as well as Baden and the Palatinate (both to occupied France) had been organized in those specific areas and not generally throughout the Reich.
37. At the Wannsee Conference the participants decided to include persons classified as Jews, but married to persons classified as so-called 'Aryans', however, only after a divorce. In October 1943 an act, facilitating compulsory divorce imposed by the state, was ready for appointment, however, Hitler never granted the competent referees an audience. Pressure by the NSDAP headquarters in early 1944 also failed. Cf. Uwe Dietrich Adam, Judenpolitik im Dritten Reich, Düsseldorf: 2003, pp. 222–234. ISBN 3-7700-4063-5
38. 8,000 Berliners whom the Nazis had classified as Jews because of three or four grandparents survived to the summer of 1944. Their personal faith — Jewish, Protestant, Catholic or irreligionist — is mostly not recorded, since only the Nazi files report on them, which use the Nazi racial definitions. 4,700 out of the 8,000 survived due to their living in a mixed marriage. 1,400 survived by hiding, out of 5,000 who tried. 1,900 had returned from Theresienstadt. See Hans-Rainer Sandvoß, Widerstand in Wedding und Gesundbrunnen, Gedenkstätte Deutscher Widerstand (ed.), Berlin: Gedenkstätte Deutscher Widerstand, 2003, (Schriftenreihe über den Widerstand in Berlin von 1933 bis 1945, No. 14), p. 302. ISSN 0175-3592
39. Bundesgesetz über die Anerkennung freier Ehen (as of 23 June 1950, Federal law on recognition of free marriages).
40. Beate Meyer, 'Jüdische Mischlinge' — Rassenpolitik und Verfolgungserfahrung 1933–1945 (1999), Hamburg: Dölling und Galitz, (2002), (Studien zur jüdischen Geschichte; vol. 6), simultaneously Hamburg, Univ., Diss., 1998, p. 469. ISBN 3-933374-22-7
41. M. Allemand in "Traité du Mariage", imprimerie E. Leboyer (Riom France, 1847) p.129
42. Arrest du Conseil d'état du Roi concernant les mariages des noirs, mulâtres, ou autres gens de couleur, du 5 avril 1778 (Lille: NJB Peterinck-Cramé, 1778).
43. {fr} Pétition des hommes de couleur de la Martinique et de la Guadeloupe, Impriperie E. Duverger, Paris (feb. 1829), p. 8-9
44. Louisiana code, art.
45. Law of September 20th, 1792
46. Archives nationales (henceforward A.N.) BB15–211, R4, no 3266
47. Allemand 1847, p. 130
48. Sir Beguin and Emilie born slave in Guadeloupe—Allemand 1847, p. 131
49. Law of April 24th, 1833
50. ^ "Theodoric". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved August 23, 2018. With his people, who may have numbered 100,000 persons, Theodoric arrived in Italy in late August 489... his people could not legally intermarry with Romans... He never missed an opportunity to propagate the idea of civilitas ("civilized life" or "civilization"), a concept that includes the maintenance of peace and order, racial harmony, and the outlawing of oppression and violence.
51. ^ "Italy: The Ostrogothic Kingdom". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved August 23, 2018. Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths, conquered Italy and killed Odoacer in 493. The decades of the Ostrogothic kingdom in Italy (493–552) can be seen as the first true period of Germanic rule in the peninsula, for an entire tribe of 100,000 to 200,000 people came with Theodoric... Theodoric, who did not want the Ostrogoths to become Romanized, encouraged them to keep their distance from the Romans. Yet such apartheid did not last. Some Romans joined the army; many more Goths became landowners, legally or illegally, and adopted civilian Roman cultural traditions.
52. "Ancient Rome: The Barbarian Kingdoms". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved August 23, 2018. The barbarians were everywhere a small minority. They established themselves on the great estates and divided the land to the benefit of the federates without doing much harm to the lower classes or disturbing the economy.
53. Freeman, Charles (March 2014). Egypt, Greece, and Rome: Civilizations of the Ancient Mediterranean. OUP Oxford. p. 640. ISBN 978-0-19-965192-4.
54. "Rugi". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved August 23, 2018. The remaining Rugi followed Theodoric for revenge, although they maintained their independence even within the Ostrogothic state, keeping their own administrators and avoiding intermarriage with the Goths. They disappeared with the fall of the Ostrogothic state.
55. Modern Humanities Research Association (1967). The Modern Language Review, Volume 4. The Rugians kept their race pure by refusing to intermarry with other tribes
56. Joshua D. Zimmerman, Jews in Italy Under Fascist and Nazi Rule, 1922-1945, pp. 119-120
57. Davide Rodogno (3 August 2006). Fascism's European Empire: Italian Occupation During the Second World War. Cambridge University Press. p. 65.
58. "Rassegna stampa: "Arabi e negri? Non sono ariani" Le leggi razziali del '38 e le circolari emanate dal regime fascista". Università degli Studi di Roma "Tor Vergata" (in Italian). Retrieved 8 August 2023.
59. "provvedimenti in materia matrimoniale e in difesa della razza" [Archive of Laws, Decrees and Regulations]. Consiglio Grande e Generale (in Italian). 1942.
60. Langmuir, Gavin I. (1 February 1996). Toward a Definition of Antisemitism. University of California Press. p. 80. ISBN 978-0-520-90851-2.
61. "Spain: Visigothic Spain to c. 500". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Retrieved August 23, 2018. Despite the collapse of imperial rule in Spain, Roman influence remained strong. The majority of the population, probably about six million, were Hispano-Romans, as compared with 200,000 barbarians... A Roman law that prohibited intermarriage between the two peoples was, however, abolished in the late 6th century. Still, the task of bringing the two peoples together and of achieving some sort of political and cultural unity was a formidable one.
62. ^ Owen, Norman G. (30 November 2004). The Emergence of Modern Southeast Asia: A New History. University of Hawaii Press. p. 248. ISBN 9780824841942.
63. Ronald Hyam (2010). Understanding the British Empire. Cambridge University Press. pp. 219–220. ISBN 9781139788465.

Bibliography

• Crowe, David M. (1995). A History of the Gypsies of Eastern Europe and Russia (1995 ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0312086916.

Further reading

• "The Canadian marriage at 150: A look back". theglobeandmail.com. November 12, 2017. Retrieved December 8, 2017.
• Thompson, Debra (2008). "Nation and Miscegenation: Comparing Anti-Miscegenation Regulations in North America" (PDF). Canadian Political Science Association.

• Racism
• Interracial marriage
• Politics and race
• Marriage reform
• Racial segregation