X marrying Y <> Y marrying X?

[Laurence Horn]

At 7:31 AM -0500 9/10/07, Landau, James wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Laurence Horn [mailto:laurence.horn at YALE.EDU]
>Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2007 11:37 PM
>Subject: Re: X marrying Y <> Y marrying X?
>
>At 11:01 PM -0400 9/9/07, Baker, John wrote:
>>The mutual aspect actually was quite important in Loving v.
>>Virginia, the 1967 case referred to.  Virginia contended that, because
>>its miscegenation statutes punished equally both the white and the
>>Negro participants in an interracial marriage, these statutes, despite
>>their reliance on racial classifications, did not constitute an
>>invidious discrimination based upon race.  The court didn't buy it.
>>
>>
>
>Wonder what the current court would have thought.
>
>________________________________
>
>We know exactly what the current Supreme Court thinks of miscegenation.
>Not only are they in favor of it, they practice it.

I don't think that follows.  We know exactly what they think of
affirmative action too, especially any member of the court who might
have "practiced" (profited from the opportunities offered by) it, and
who would therefore be expected to support its availability for
others....Oops.

But this is getting too OT, so I'll stop here.

LH

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org