Anyone who thinks it is eliminated in your country except for a small minority apparently has not tried getting married in some states like Virginia
Ms Rogers told the BBC: "We got engaged in July 2018. In Virginia you have 60 days to apply for the license before the registry. We applied for our license in Rockbridge County and went to the clerk's office on 3 September. The clerk tried to fill out the application without the race question filled for us but the computer wouldn't let her."
Mr Churchill added: "Many of the categories were outdated, offensive racist terms which have no place in the 21st century. We said we were uncomfortable and left."
Virginia is one of eight states in the US with this legal requirement to identify race prior to marriage.
Mr Glasberg notes that in Virginia, "this requirement reflects a regulatory scheme embodied in the Virginia Racial Integrity Act of 1924, originally called 'An Act to Preserve the Integrity of the White Race'."
He says that the requirement for race on marriage records was grounded in bigotry.
Canada’s race problem? It’s even worse than America’s.
For a country so self-satisfied with its image of progressive tolerance, how is this not a national crisis?
Almost 250 yrs behind in Govt...100 yrs behind in Race Relations
sounds like Canuck has a lot of work to do in Canada....probably won't see him posting here anymore.
Pretty unbelievable stuff, Sam.....the kind of stuff in American westerns that were more enlightened. Hard to believe that can happen in a first world nation.
Of course what goes on in Quebec is racist and should not be allowed.
I hope the courts put an end to it since it is certainly not good for anyone but that is what happens when you elect bigots and apparently many rural riding filled with 'white' voters in Quebec are racist and bigots and so they got a racist government.
I did not read the article in Macleans yet but think it is probably talking about the federal election and how the federal parties are tip toeing around that racism in Quebec because they do not want to alienate those racist voters. It is unfortunate that ALL the federal parties do not come out against the racism equally and then those bigoted voters would all be upset with all the parties. I do think that most of the federal parties are against that legislation and will eventually support the legal process which should stop it. There is one party that I have some doubts about how much they might oppose it though and that is what keeps the others tip going around the issue ahead of the election.
If you knew me and my family and friends you would know it is not me.
I do receive the Macleans magazine and prefer to read those stories there rather than online but that story has been on the TV newscasts and doubt Macleans story is much different from what I have watched on the live news.
Macleans will go more in depth than the TV so may be some twists but will not change the main point that there are a bunch of racist bigots in rural Quebec and they elected a bigoted government. Hopefully our constitution and the courts will sort it out and allow ALL citizens the same rights.
But it is too bad that the federal parties do not ALL come out opposed to it rather than try to win an election bay catering to those bigots in rural Quebec.
Well surprise me and tell me what it is about if not the Quebec legislation discriminating against anyone wearing religious adornments. it has been cooking along for a few years now all while their legislature has a cross in it.
Yep, religious bigots.
Now if it is about anything else then I have missed that story and would like to catch up so tell me all about it is I am wrong.
The Quebec Bill 21 is an old story that has surfaced again recently as the election campaign kicks off and the Conservatives especially are trying to take some seats away from the Bloc so they are trying not to say anything against Bill 21 and hence the other parties will not say anything against it publicly either which would take votes away from them in rural bigoted Quebec seats.
Check this story from June long before the election campaign
The new secularism law, once known as Bill 21, makes it illegal to wear religious symbols at work if you're a public school teacher, a police officer, a judge, a prison guard, a wildlife officer, a Crown prosecutor or if you work as a lawyer for the government. It applies to other jobs too — the full list is here.
The legislation also lays out the rules requiring citizens to uncover their faces to receive a public service for identification or security purposes.