Miscegenation: Morality vs. Prejudice in Societal Terms

Topics: Marriage, Racism, Race and Ethnicity Pages: 9 (3133 words) Published: March 24, 2007
Morality versus Prejudice in Societal Terms
RS-360 Foundations of Christian Morality
March 7, 2007
Statements that miscegenation destroys every race that practices it are mistaken. In fact, miscegenation or race mixing emphasizes a commitment to compromise and compassion for all humankind. Critics advocate that allies of miscegenation jeopardize religious fundamentals, such as a Christian's posterity or a Muslim's forgiveness. Critics also challenge the excessive amount of propaganda that favors miscegenation arguing that these tactics of acceptance are intensified by media exposure but not morally acceptable. While it is true that the media exposes a great deal of tolerance for miscegenation and do so within legal boundaries, Christians and Muslims have strong belifes in their faith and opposition on miscegenation. Regardless there are millions of people who deny this opposition and feel that their beliefs and compassion supersede the stance and seek to persuade people to look past their prejudices and consider the broader affect of miscegenation. By do that Americans can display their morals in the true form of freedom, in which collective values, rather than separate interpretations will represent the highest supremacy. By definition miscegenation is the interbreeding of different races or of persons of different racial backgrounds. It is the cohabitation, sexual relations, or marriage involving persons of different races.(Webster). miscegenation marriages have a difficult fence to climb, to include prejudice of others and the innate problems of cultural pressure already embedded in a marriage. miscegenation marriages enrich society and thus the parent of birracial children just want what any other parent wants, happiness for their children. Incidentally these children will have the benefit of two cultures and hopefully the strength to stand for their cultural differences and confidence in their moral construct. As a society it is the challenge of Americans to dismiss this prejudice and not reduce morality one single construct, because there is not just one right answer and therefore culturally there is not one morally correct direction in life On June 12, 1967 the Supreme Court ruled that laws against miscegenation were unconstitutional in the United States of America. Even though the law prohibited miscegenation marriages many people viewed this as a social conflict with religious undertones of the moral foundations of this country. For centuries there have been racist practices directed against people of color and has been an inherent component of American history to include present day American society. As stated by Don McLeese "There was musical miscegenation at a time when segregation was the common rule" ,Therefore, as a society Americans have innate racist attitudes that are entrenched in American culture. There are common cultural differences that breeds prejudice through ignorance and those racial differences are heightened when combined with miscegenation marriages. These common racial differences are a combination of cultural separatism with the added problems of a miscegenation marriage that add up to conflict on personal and societal levels where both partners in the marriage must take a risk and believe in their love and moral construct to withstand the indifference ahead. Moral deeds constantly materialize in every day life, directing almost everything we do. Our moral construct is constantly challenged by societal pressure to follow their guidelines on what is determined morally acceptable and chastising those who do not follow these rules. . For years now, the leading voices of our cultural world have been telling us that diversity is an unconditional good. Promoting that there could never have too much diversity. Critics of miscengenation disagree commenting that racial and ethnic diversity weaken any group's ability to harmoniously...

Cited: Baer, Judith A. Equality under the Constitution. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1983.
Moran, Rachel F. Interracial Intimacy: The Regulation of Race and Romance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.
Sollors, Werner, ed. Interracialism: Black-White Intermarriage in American History, Literature, and Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Spann, Girardeau A. Race against the Court: Supreme Court and Minorities in Contemporary America. New York: New York University Press, 1993.
The King James Version Apocrypha
Continue Reading

Please join StudyMode to read the full document

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Pride and Prejudice vs Bride and Prejudice Essay
  • Term Paper on Pride and Prejudice
  • Pride and Prejudice Term Paper
  • Morality vs. Duty Essay
  • Essay on Morality vs. Progress
  • Family vs. Morality Essay
  • Law vs. morality Essay
  • Human Morality vs Conformity Essay

Become a StudyMode Member

Sign Up - It's Free