Church refuses to marry black couple in Mississipp

[Deleted]

I love this quote: "If it was such a minority of people, why didn't the majority stand up and say, 'in God's house we don't do this?'"


edition.cnn.com/2012/07/30/us/mississippi-black-couple-wedding/index.html

Hurt. Devastated. Crushed.

Those are words an African-American couple used to describe how they felt when they were forced to change the venue of their wedding because of their race.

"Because of the fact that we were black, some of the members of the congregation had got upset and decided that no black couple would ever be married at that church," Charles Wilson told CNN on Sunday night.

"All we wanted to do in the eyes of God was to be man and wife in a church that we thought we felt loved. What was wrong with that?"
Black couple denied wedding in church
Charles and Te'Andrea Wilson had planned to marry this month at the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs in Mississippi, but were asked at the last minute to move.

Their pastor, Stan Weatherford, made the request on behalf of some congregants who didn't want to see the couple married there, according to CNN affiliate WLBT. He performed the ceremony at a nearby church.

"This was, had not, had never been done here before so it was setting a new (precedent) and there were those who reacted to that," Weatherford told WLBT.

"I didn't want to have a controversy within the church, and I didn't want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te' Andrea. I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day," he reportedly said.
On Sunday, some church members reacted to news of the wedding with surprise, many hadn't known what happened to the Wilsons until they heard about it on the news, and offered apologies.

"I would say I'm sorry this happened and would you forgive the people who caused it? Because we're gonna try to," Bob Mack told WLBT.

Talking about the group that opposed the wedding he said: "We hope we can straighten them out, you know, get them to understand what Christianity is all about because they have some misconceptions about it."

But for Charles and Te'Andrea Wilson, support from the church now might be too little, too late.

"I had dreams of having my wedding the way I wanted it, and I also dreamed of having it at the church and unfortunately, it didn't happen," Te'Andrea Wilson told CNN.

Her husband said if there was a time to "step up and be Christ-like," it was before their wedding. Hindsight is 20/20.

"If it was such a minority of people, why didn't the majority stand up and say, 'in God's house we don't do this?'" said Charles Wilson.

[Deleted]

Wow, this makes no sense to me. If they have such a problem with blacks, why let them in the church and then later, refuse to marry them? I really don't get that, because if blacks bother you so much, wouldn't it bother you more to have them sitting there every Sunday than to have them in your church at a wedding you don't even have to go to?

It makes me wonder if the problem was really the minster and not the parishioners.

[Michelle]

Jul 30, 2012 6:37:31 GMT -5 sandsonik said:

Wow, this makes no sense to me. If they have such a problem with blacks, why let them in the church and then later, refuse to marry them? I really don't get that, because if blacks bother you so much, wouldn't it bother you more to have them sitting there every Sunday than to have them in your church at a wedding you don't even have to go to?

It makes me wonder if the problem was really the minster and not the parishioners.

The problem was definitely the minister who should have told anyone making such a request that it was disgusting. Chances are it was his problem or that of the richest people in the church which makes it doubly disgusting.

[charminglife]

WTF. as a minister, how do you let a small group of parishioners dictate something like this? Terrible leadership.

[ringstrue]

Jul 30, 2012 8:03:38 GMT -5 charminglife said:

WTF. as a minister, how do you let a small group of parishioners dictate something like this? Terrible leadership.

I know how. They were probably the only ones making sizable contributions to the church.

[secretlyevil]

I can't believe this stuff still surprises shocks me.

[aurora]

Well, I suppose on the bright side now that the racism is out in the open people can refuse to support this hateful church. But, that really stinks for the poor couple and for race relations.

[heyjude]

It is too early to feel this repulsed.

[Deleted]

Ok, how is this not blatant discrimination not illegal??
That's horrifying, just awful.

[kasi]

I'm shocked the minister actually went through with not letting them marry there. I doubt the paritioners that objected were even invited so they wou;dn't have "seen" anything. I don't understand their way of thinking at all. I garee with some of the others. The paritioners who didn't want to see a black couple marry there must have plenty of pull with the church.

[secretlyevil]

Jul 30, 2012 9:37:49 GMT -5 @lauriergirl28 said:

Ok, how is this not blatant discrimination not illegal??
That's horrifying, just awful.

Because it's a church?

[NitaX]

Jul 30, 2012 9:36:50 GMT -5 cjoy said:

WTF? What year is it?

The Year of Bigotry. Can't you tell? It's making a grand resurgence.

[Deleted]

It's too bad we can vote other states out of the union.

[charminglife]

What kind of recourse does this couple have? Anything? or is their only option to leave the church and find a new one?

[NitaX]

Jul 30, 2012 10:25:56 GMT -5 charminglife said:

What kind of recourse does this couple have? Anything? or is their only option to leave the church and find a new one?

If it were me, I'd do some recon and find out who the fuck it was. Then, I'd go to church every Sunday and sit right next to their asses. I'd even mail them Christmas cards with black people on it. I'd also invite all my family members to church and sit next to their hateful asses.

[meshaliuknits]

Jul 30, 2012 10:09:47 GMT -5 NitaX said:

Jul 30, 2012 9:36:50 GMT -5 cjoy said:

WTF? What year is it?

The Year of Bigotry. Can't you tell? It's making a grand resurgence.

Noooo! The president is black! It's a post-racial society!

[charminglife]

Jul 30, 2012 10:30:51 GMT -5 NitaX said:

Jul 30, 2012 10:25:56 GMT -5 charminglife said:

What kind of recourse does this couple have? Anything? or is their only option to leave the church and find a new one?

If it were me, I'd do some recon and find out who the fuck it was. Then, I'd go to church every Sunday and sit right next to their asses. I'd even mail them Christmas cards with black people on it. I'd also invite all my family members to church and sit next to their hateful asses.

I like your style.

[dylanite]

It's so sad how little I'm surprised. As a result, I deleted my previous sig since the humor probably wouldn't be found as well in this thread.

[mominatrix]

Jul 30, 2012 9:47:59 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

Jul 30, 2012 9:37:49 GMT -5 @lauriergirl28 said:

Ok, how is this not blatant discrimination not illegal??
That's horrifying, just awful.

Because it's a church?

it might be, or not.

it's rough, because you butt up against first amendment freedom of religion stuff when you have courts telling churches who to marry (so... If a court found this to be illegal, could it be precedent to force churches to marry teh gayz??)

...via mobile.

[mominatrix]

Jul 30, 2012 10:30:51 GMT -5 NitaX said:

Jul 30, 2012 10:25:56 GMT -5 charminglife said:

What kind of recourse does this couple have? Anything? or is their only option to leave the church and find a new one?

If it were me, I'd do some recon and find out who the fuck it was. Then, I'd go to church every Sunday and sit right next to their asses. I'd even mail them Christmas cards with black people on it. I'd also invite all my family members to church and sit next to their hateful asses.

Love.
...via mobile.

[lyssbobiss, Command, B613]

Talk to me because I'm having a hard time forming a cogent argument about this, but when we say that churches aren't required to perform, say, gay marriages, even if they are legalized, is this situation different? Should a church be required to perform ceremonies for people of different races if they chose not to?

Please note that I think what they did is disgusting and ugly and racist and horrible. I guess I want to figure out how, if possible, to differentiate between this situation and situations where churches don't marry gay couples.

[dylanite]

Jul 30, 2012 10:38:36 GMT -5 lyssbobiss, Command, B613 said:

Talk to me because I'm having a hard time forming a cogent argument about this, but when we say that churches aren't required to perform, say, gay marriages, even if they are legalized, is this situation different? Should a church be required to perform ceremonies for people of different races if they chose not to?

Please note that I think what they did is disgusting and ugly and racist and horrible. I guess I want to figure out how, if possible, to differentiate between this situation and situations where churches don't marry gay couples.

I think it's exactly the same as their right to allow gay weddings.

[mominatrix]

Jul 30, 2012 10:25:56 GMT -5 charminglife said:

What kind of recourse does this couple have? Anything? or is their only option to leave the church and find a new one?

If I was in the room with them, I'd get them to contact the USDOJ civil rights division...

What happened here is completely wrong. I hope that somebody can figure out that it's also illegal.

...my strategy would be to say it's not about the religiousness of the church ceremony - the pastor.did it elsewhere... It's about the building as a place of public accommodation - like whether they'll rent out the basement for AA meetings. Not religious = not exempt. But that's a fine distinction to draw, and I'd not give it more than about 30% chance of success, especially in a southern circuit court.

...via mobile.

[wawa]

Jul 30, 2012 10:38:36 GMT -5 lyssbobiss, Command, B613 said:

Talk to me because I'm having a hard time forming a cogent argument about this, but when we say that churches aren't required to perform, say, gay marriages, even if they are legalized, is this situation different? Should a church be required to perform ceremonies for people of different races if they chose not to?

Please note that I think what they did is disgusting and ugly and racist and horrible. I guess I want to figure out how, if possible, to differentiate between this situation and situations where churches don't marry gay couples.

For me it comes down to whether the difference they are focused on is actually relevant to the religious ceremony at hand. And I thought from previous conversations that the law saw it similarly. I'm no expert there though..

It's the same reason the catholic church can't be sued for gender discrimination when they refuse to hire women as priests. But they could be sued for refusing to hire female janitors. One of them has requirements that are tenets of their faith. The other just means they're assholes.

[secretlyevil]

Jul 30, 2012 10:42:38 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Jul 30, 2012 10:25:56 GMT -5 charminglife said:

What kind of recourse does this couple have? Anything? or is their only option to leave the church and find a new one?

If I was in the room with them, I'd get them to contact the USDOJ civil rights division...

What happened here is completely wrong. I hope that somebody can figure out that it's also illegal.

...my strategy would be to say it's not about the religiousness of the church ceremony - the pastor.did it elsewhere... It's about the building as a place of public accommodation - like whether they'll rent out the basement for AA meetings. Not religious = not exempt. But that's a fine distinction to draw, and I'd not give it more than about 30% chance of success, especially in a southern circuit court.

...via mobile.

In the local courts it probably wouldn't get far but at higher level appellant courts, you may have a better chance.

I really should stop being so naive about the south, bigotry, racism and hate is rampant down here, even in FL which apparently doesn't consider itself a "true southern state."

[wrathofkuus]

Is it too soon for a "but if the black couple had GUNS..." response?

[penguingrrl]

OMG, I just can't believe this is still happening in 2012. Disgusting.

[Deleted]

Jul 30, 2012 10:30:51 GMT -5 NitaX said:

Jul 30, 2012 10:25:56 GMT -5 charminglife said:

What kind of recourse does this couple have? Anything? or is their only option to leave the church and find a new one?

If it were me, I'd do some recon and find out who the fuck it was. Then, I'd go to church every Sunday and sit right next to their asses. I'd even mail them Christmas cards with black people on it. I'd also invite all my family members to church and sit next to their hateful asses.

how about also a present (copy of the 14th amendment?) wrapped in paper with black santas on it? i mean, everyone knows that santa is white just like jesus, so that would blow some minds.

[bqbride]

How very Christ-like of them.

[lilmgirl]

Jul 30, 2012 10:32:44 GMT -5 meshaliuknits said:

Jul 30, 2012 10:09:47 GMT -5 NitaX said:

The Year of Bigotry. Can't you tell? It's making a grand resurgence.

Noooo! The president is black! It's a post-racial society!

Took the words right out of my mouth.