X marrying Y <> Y marrying X?

Wilson Gray hwgray at GMAIL.COM
Mon Sep 10 18:43:09 UTC 2007

Let's not stop, yet! Jim's story reminds of a Missouri example that I
know of. A childhood friend of mine and a Scotsman that she had met
during one of those semester-in-Europe trips got married in a big
church wedding in Saint Louis in 1961. But such a ceremony that took
place in Missouri had no legal standing, because of that state's
anti-miscegenation laws. So, first, it was "into the flivver and
across the river" to East Saint Louis, where they got married legally,
then back to Saint Louis for the big church wedding the following


On 9/10/07, Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at yale.edu> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: X marrying Y <> Y marrying X?
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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

All say, "How hard it is that we have to die"---a strange complaint to
come from the mouths of people who have had to live.
                                              -Sam'l Clemens

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

More information about the Ads-l mailing list