Further erosion of the American taboo on exogamy

Segregated prom tradition yields to unity

When I was a kid most people disapproved marrying outside the religious denomination in which you were born and raised.

When I was a kid, white people generally disapproved marrying outside one’s own ethnic group, for that matter - French, Dutch, Irish, or whatever - though generally not as much as marrying outside one’s religion.

To this day, Jews generally disapprove Jews marrying non-Jews.

I suspect most people of all races would still count it against a marriage that it crossed racial, ethnic, or religious lines, more recent immigrants more than others.

And when I was a kid prevention of interracial marriage was one of the big reasons for social, if not legal, segregation.

Socializing leads to dating leads to . . . well, you know how it goes.

Liberals disapprove such sentiments.

In truth, they approve of diversity for only as long as the process of erasing it takes, minimally, to set in.

After that, everybody’s supposed to have the same café-au-lait skin and slightly not-round eyes.

Efforts to prevent exogamy, either personal or political, limited or general, are just evil, in their eyes.

And this is really important, to them, unless resistance would cross one of their other taboos.

Alan Dershowitz recently wrote against the disappearance of American Jewry through both a shortfall of fecundity and persistent exogamy, for instance.

The liberals voiced no criticism, or muted criticism at most, he being Jewish.

You can criticize Israel but you can't criticize Jews for being concerned for the survival of Jews as a distinct people.

You can't insist they shouldn't mind blending away with others into a uniform mix, leaving all that troublesome diversity behind in the lost, unlamented past.

But you can imagine what they would have said about somebody expressing concern about plummeting fertility and miscegenation eventually wiping out white people, or Germans, or even Russians, seriously diminishing their numbers.

Somebody like Pat Buchanan, perhaps.

See?

You don't have to imagine.

You know well what they said.

And you recall their celebration of and enduring support for this famous constitutional innovation of the liberal Supremes of the mid-20^th Century.

Loving v. Virginia

Though I must say I agree that flat outlawing miscegenation was going a bit far.