I had no idea of the horror this decent couple and their 3 kids went through. And the arguments are so similar to those of today.

Thanks for the post.

This year I watched ' The Loving Story' on HBO and I think it was last year that I watched 'Mr. and Mrs. Loving' on the History Channel or somewhere on cable - I really can't remember where now.

They are both great films.

I must admit that I did not know much at all about their struggle until I watched those two films.

The fact that she wrote to RFK and he read her letter before sending it off to the ACLU, to me, was quite an interesting tidbit.

It is sad that Mildred and her husband are no longer with us

According to the article on the link below...

Their son Robert died in 2000

Peggy Loving (Fortune) is the couple’s only surviving daughter

Here: http://kathmanduk2.wordpress.com/2011/04/28/richard-and-mildred-loving-the-love-story-that-made-marriage-a-fundamental-right/


Sidney died May 5, 2010.

Come on, just one more. The same arguments used against interracial marriage are being use by the same people opposed to marriage equality.

the President of the United States evolved in his opinion of marriage equality (and before re-election- gutsy IMO), so can we all. Equal rights for all, or none.

Last edited Thu Mar 28, 2013, 12:33 PM - Edit history (1)

...(women) are STILL fighting for equal rights and treatment under the law, and that cases STILL have to be brought before the United States Supreme Court to adjudicate the civil rights of gay US citizens, which is clearly settled law under the 14th Amendment for ALL US citizens (equal treatment under the law), is sad, ridiculous and disgusting...

Word.

He's an actual red neck that just fell in love with the woman next door.

Also interesting is to learn about the lawyers, basically newly minted lawyers with little experience.

suited to each other and in love they always seemed to be. Lovely, lovely couple.

. . . I got into a discussion with a Libertarian on Facebook about this case, in the context of a discussion about gay marriage. While he supports the notion of marriage equality, in typical Libertarian fashion he said he wanted government "out of the marriage business altogether." I pointed out to him that in so far as marriage consists in part of a contractual relationship, government can never be entirely "out of the marriage business. He conceded that, but then said it should ONLY be involved in mediating disputes that arise in that contractual relationship, and went on to say (again in very typical Libertarian fashion) that whenever the federal government gets involved in something, it overreaches. I asked him if there was some great history of federal government intrusion into heterosexual marriages that I was unaware of. Incredibly, he said, "Loving v. Virginia comes to mind." So I pointed out that, on the contrary, far from interfering with marriages, the Loving case prevented state governments from intruding on heterosexual, interracial marriages. "Well," he said, "it's really about expanding the federal government." So I asked him exactly how Loving "expanded the federal government" -- what new agency or position did that ruling create? He evaded the question and said something about how the federal government has done an "awful lot of quite anti-liberty things" in the past century. Here is how I responded:

It seems to me you are playing a bit of a shell game with your argument here. I mean, first you hold up Loving as an example of federal government intrusion into heterosexual marriages. When I ask you to elaborate, you back away from that and way, 'well, it's really about expanding the federal government.' Then, when I ask you to elaborate on exactly how it expanded the federal government, you make some vague reference to some "quite anti-Liberty things" you allege the federal government has done. I mean, do you have a substantive argument that amounts to anything more than a shape-shifting recitation of stock Libertarian talking points?

Yeah, I know -- it was kinda mean -- but I really enjoyed it! And there has been no response in two days.