Jump to content

Anti-miscegenation laws: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Nazi Germany: interwiki
Line 62: Line 62:
Saudi women are prohibited from marrying men from outside the [[Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf|GCC]] countries except with a special dispensation from the King. Saudi men are permitted to marry whomever they choose.
Saudi women are prohibited from marrying men from outside the [[Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf|GCC]] countries except with a special dispensation from the King. Saudi men are permitted to marry whomever they choose.
<ref>{{Citation|url=http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_931.html|title=Saudi Marriage|publisher=US Department of State|accessdate=2010-10-19}}</ref>
<ref>{{Citation|url=http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_931.html|title=Saudi Marriage|publisher=US Department of State|accessdate=2010-10-19}}</ref>

===Israel===
{{further2|[[Marriage in Israel]] }}
Legal marriages in Israel can only be performed by one of the country's nine recognized confessional communities, and inter-community marriages are generally not possible. Since 2006, foreign marriages have been recognized as fully legal in Israel, and many inter-community marriages are contracted outside of Israel. Since 2010 it has also been possible to contract a civil partnership when both partners declare that they do not belong to any religious community, but this is not legally a marriage under Israeli law.<ref>[http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/controversial-civil-union-bill-up-for-discussion-1.264360 ''Controversial civil union bill up for discussion''], [[Haaretz]]</ref>


==Asia==
==Asia==

Revision as of 10:10, 2 July 2012

Part of a series on
Discrimination
Forms
Attributes
Social
Religious
Ethnic/national
Manifestations
Policies
Countermeasures
Related topics

Anti-miscegenation laws, also known as miscegenation laws, were laws that enforced racial segregation at the level of marriage and intimate relationships by criminalizing interracial marriage and sometimes also sex between members of different races. Such laws were first introduced in North America from the late seventeenth century onwards by several of the Thirteen Colonies, and subsequently by many US states and US territories and remained in force in many US states until 1967. After the Second World War, an increasing number of states repealed their anti-miscegenation laws. In 1967, in Loving v. Virginia, the remaining anti-miscegenation laws were held to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States. Similar laws were also enforced in Nazi Germany as part of the Nuremberg laws, and in South Africa as part of the system of Apartheid. In the United States, interracial marriage, cohabitation and sex have been termed "miscegenation" since the term was coined in 1863. Contemporary usage of the term is less frequent, except to refer to historical laws banning the practice.

United States

Main article: Anti-miscegenation laws in the United States

Nazi Germany

Discrimination against miscegenation mostly followed the mainstream Nazi anti-Semitism, which considered the Jews to be a group of people bound by close, so-called genetic (blood) ties to form a unit which one could neither join nor secede from. The influence of Jews had been declared to have detrimental impact on Germany, in order to rectify the discriminations and persecutions of Jews. To be spared, one had to prove one's affiliation with the group of the Aryan race (cf. Aryan certificate).

Although Nazi doctrine stressed the importance of physiognomy and genes in determining race, in practice race was determined only through the religions followed by each individual's ancestors. Individuals were considered non-Aryan (i.e. Jewish) if at least three of four of their grandparents had been enrolled as members of a Jewish congregation; it did not matter if those grandparents had been born to a Jewish family or had converted to Judaism in adulthood. The actual religious beliefs of the individual himself or herself were also immaterial, as was the individual's status under Halachic law.

An anti-miscegenation law was enacted by the National Socialist government in September 1935 as part of the Nuremberg Laws. The Gesetz zum Schutze des deutschen Blutes und der deutschen Ehre (Protection of German Blood and German Honor Act), enacted on 15 September 1935, forbade marriage and extramarital sexual relations between persons racially – or rather racistically – regarded as non-Aryans and Aryans (persons of “German or related blood”), this included all marriages, where at least one partner was a German citizen.[1] Non-Aryans comprised mostly Jewish Germans and Gentile Germans of Jewish descent. However, Germans of extra-European and especially of African descent and Germans regarded as belonging to the minority group of Sinti and Roma (Gypsies) were also considered as non-Aryans. On November 14, the law was extended to Gypsies and Blacks.[2] Such extramarital intercourse was marked as Rassenschande (lit. race-disgrace) and could be punished by imprisonment – later usually followed by the deportation to a concentration camp, often entailing the inmate's death. Germans of African and other extra-European descent were classified following their own origin or the origin of their parents. Sinti and Roma were mostly categorised following police records, e.g. mentioning them or their forefathers as Gypsies, when having been met by the police as travelling peddlers.

The existing 20,454 (as of 1939) marriages between persons racially regarded as Aryans and so-called non-Aryans – called mixed marriages (German: Mischehe) – would continue.[3] However, the government eased the conditions for the divorce of mixed marriages.[4] In the beginning the Nazi authorities hoped to make the Aryan partner get a divorce from their non-Aryan-classified spouses, by granting easy legal divorce procedures and opportunities for the Aryan spouse to withhold most of the common property after a divorce.[5] Those who stuck to their spouse, would suffer discriminations like dismissal from public employment, exclusion from civic society organisations, etc.[6]

Eventual children – whenever born – within a mixed marriage, as well as children from extramarital mixed relationships born until July 31, 1936, were discriminated as Mischlinge. However, children later born to mixed parents, not yet married at passing the Nuremberg Laws, were to be discriminated as Geltungsjuden, regardless if the parents had meanwhile married abroad or remained unmarried. Eventual children, who were enrolled in a Jewish congregation, were also subject to the discrimination as Geltungsjuden.

According to the Nazi family value attitude the husband was regarded the head of a family. Thus people living in a mixed marriage were treated differently according to the sex of the Aryan spouse and according to the religious affiliation of the children, their being or not being enrolled with a Jewish congregation. Nazi-termed mixed marriages were often not interfaith marriages, because in many cases the classification of one spouse as non-Aryan was only due to her or his grandparents, being enrolled with a Jewish congregation or else classified as non-Aryan. In many cases both spouses had a common faith, either because the parents had already converted or because at marrying one spouse converted to the religion of the second (Marital conversion). Traditionally the wife used to be the convert.[7] However, in urban areas and after 1900 actual interfaith marriages occurred more often, with interfaith marriages legally allowed in some states of the German Confederation since 1847, and generally since 1875, when civil marriage became an obligatory prerequisite for any religious marriage ceremony all around united Germany.

Most mixed marriages occurred with one spouse being considered as non-Aryan, due to his or her Jewish descent. So many special regulations were developed for such couples. A differentiation of privileged and other mixed marriages emerged on 28 December 1938, when Hermann Göring discretionarily ordered this in a letter to the Reich's Ministry of the Interior.[8] The "Gesetz über die Mietverhältnisse mit Juden" (English: Law on Tenancies with Jews) of 30 April 1939, allowing proprietors to unconditionally cancel tenancy contracts with Germans, classified as Jews, and forcing them to move into houses reserved for them, for the first time enacted Göring's spontaneous creation, by defining privileged mixed marriages and excepting them from the act.[9]

The legal definitions decreed: The marriage of a Gentile husband and his wife, being a Jewess or being classified as a Jewess due to her descent, was generally considered to be a privileged mixed marriage, unless they had children, who were enrolled in a Jewish congregation. Then the husband was obviously not the dominant part in the family and the wife had to wear the Yellow badge and the children as well, who were thus discriminated as Geltungsjuden. Without children, or with children not enrolled with a Jewish congregation, the Jewish-classified wife was spared from wearing the yellow badge (else compulsory for Germans classified as Jews as of 1 September 1941).

In the opposite case, when the wife was classified as an Aryan and the husband as a Jew, the husband had to wear the yellow badge, if they had no children or children enrolled with a Jewish congregation. In case they had common children not enrolled in a Jewish congregation (irreligionist, Christian etc.) they were discriminated as Mischlinge and their father was spared from wearing the yellow badge.

Since there was no elaborate regulation, the practice of excepting privileged mixed marriages from anti-Semitic invidiousnesses varied amongst Greater Germany's different Reichsgaue, however all discriminations enacted until December 28, 1938 remained valid without exceptions for privileged mixed marriages. In the Reichsgau Hamburg, e.g., Jewish-classified spouses living in privileged mixed marriages received equal food rations like Aryan-classified Germans, in many other Reichsgaue they received shortened rations.[10] In some Reichsgaue also privileged mixed couples and their eventually minor children, whose father was classified as a Jew, were forced to move into houses reserved for Jews only, in 1942 and 1943, thus making a privileged mixed marriage one, where the husband was the one classified Aryan.

The arbitrary practice for privileged mixed marriages led to different compulsions to forced labour in 1940, partially ordered for all Jewish-classified spouses, or only for Jewish-classified husbands or only excepting Jewish-classified wives, taking care of minor children. No document indicated the exception of a mixed marriage from some persecutions and especially of its Jewish-classified spouse.[11] Thus on an eventual arrest, non-arrested relatives or friends had to prove the exceptional status, hopefully fast enough to rescue the arrested from eventual deportation.

Systematic deportations of Jewish Germans and Gentile Germans of Jewish descent started on October 18, 1941.[12] German Jews and Jewesses and German Gentiles of Jewish descent living in mixed marriage were in fact mostly spared from deportation.[13] In case a mixed marriage ended by death of the Aryan spouse or divorce the Jewish-classified spouse, residing within Germany, was usually deported soon after, unless the couple still had minor children not counting as Geltungsjuden.[10]

In March 1943 an attempt to deport the Berlin-based Jews and Gentiles of Jewish descent, living in non-privileged mixed marriages, failed due to public protest by their relatives-in-law of Aryan kinship (see Rosenstraße protest). Also the Aryan-classified husbands and Mischling-classified children (starting at the age of 16) from mixed marriages were taken by the Organisation Todt for forced labour, starting in autumn 1944.

A last attempt, undertaken in February/March 1945 ended, because the extermination camps already were liberated. However, 2,600 from all over the Reich were deported to Theresienstadt, of whom most survived the last months until their liberation.[14]

With the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 the laws banning mixed marriages were lifted again. If couples, who lived together already during the Nazi era, however unmarried due to the legal restrictions, married after the war, their date of marriage had been legally retroactively backdated, if they wished so, to the date they formed a couple.[15] Even if one spouse was already dead, the marriage could be retroactively recognised, in order to legitimise eventual children and enable them or the surviving spouse to inherit from their late father or partner, respectively. In the West German Federal Republic of Germany 1,823 couples applied for recognition (until 1963), which was granted in 1,255 cases.[16]

South Africa under apartheid

South Africa’s Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act, passed in 1949 under Apartheid, forbade marriages between whites and non-whites. The Population Registration Act (No. 30) of 1950 provided the basis for separating the population of South Africa into different races. Under the terms of this act, all residents of South Africa were to be classified as white, coloured, or native (later called Bantu) people. Indians were included under the category "Asian" in 1959. Also in 1950, the Immorality Act was passed, which criminalized all sexual relations between whites and non-whites. The Immorality Act of 1950 extended an earlier ban on sexual relations between whites and blacks (the Immorality Act [No. 5] of 1927) to a ban on sexual relations between whites and any non-whites.[17] Both Acts were repealed in 1985.

Middle East

Egypt

In Egypt the government reviews all marriages between Egyptian men and Israeli women to decide on an individual basis whether to strip the men of their Egyptian citizenship. The cabinet takes into consideration whether the Israeli woman is an Arab or a Jew. Egyptian law says citizenship can only be revoked if the citizen is proven to be spying on his country, and marrying an Israeli is considered an act of spying.[18]

Saudi Arabia

Saudi women are prohibited from marrying men from outside the GCC countries except with a special dispensation from the King. Saudi men are permitted to marry whomever they choose. [19]

Israel

Further information: Marriage in Israel

Legal marriages in Israel can only be performed by one of the country's nine recognized confessional communities, and inter-community marriages are generally not possible. Since 2006, foreign marriages have been recognized as fully legal in Israel, and many inter-community marriages are contracted outside of Israel. Since 2010 it has also been possible to contract a civil partnership when both partners declare that they do not belong to any religious community, but this is not legally a marriage under Israeli law.[20]

Asia

China

There have been various periods in the history of China where large numbers of Arabs, Persians and Turks from the "Western Regions" (Central Asia and West Asia) migrated to China, beginning with the arrival of Islam during the Tang Dynasty in the 7th century. Due to the majority of these immigrants being male, they often intermarried with local Han Chinese females. Laws and policies which discouraged miscegenation were issued, including an 836 AD decree forbidding Chinese to have relations with other peoples such as Iranians, Arabs, Indians, Malays, Sumatrans, and so on.[21] Race riots and massacres resulting in the deaths of several thousand Muslim merchants like Arabs and Persians in Hangzhou occurred. These laws were later relaxed during the Song Dynasty, which allowed third-generation immigrants with official titles to intermarry with Chinese imperial princesses. Immigration to China increased under the Mongol Empire, when large numbers of West and Central Asians were brought over to help govern Yuan China in the 13th century. Intermarriage was later encouraged during the Ming Dynasty.[22] By the 14th century, the total population of Muslims in China had grown to 4 million.[23] After Mongol rule had been overthrown by the Ming Dynasty in 1368, this led to a violent Chinese backlash against West and Central Asians. In order to contain the violence, the Ming administration instituted a pro-miscegenation policy where all West and Central Asian males were required to intermarry with native Chinese females, hence assimilating them into the local population. Their descendants are today known as the Hui people.[22]

British India and independent India

As British females began arriving to British India in large numbers around the early to mid-19th century, miscegenation became increasingly common. Relations between Indian men and British women became despised after the events of the Indian Rebellion of 1857, known as "India's First War of Independence" to the Indians and as the "Sepoy Mutiny" to the British, where Indian sepoys rebelled against the British East India Company. While incidents of war rape committed by Indian rebels against English women and girls occurred during the rebellion, this was exaggerated to great effect by the British media in order to justify vicious reprisals in the short run and continued British colonialism in the Indian subcontinent in the long run.[24]

Despite the questionable authenticity of many colonial accounts regarding the rebellion, the stereotype of the Indian "dark-skinned rapist" occurred frequently in English literature of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The idea of protecting English "female chastity" from the "lustful Indian male" had a significant influence on the policies of the British Raj. However, while widespread prejudice, and the fear of professional and personal ruin prevented significant numbers from inter-marrying, there were no formal laws prohibiting marriage between Britons and Indians in British-ruled India.[citation needed]

India's Constitution refers to the children of an Indian father and European mother as Indian but the children of a European father and Indian mother as "Anglo-Indian".[25]

Malaysia

There are no formal statistics in Malaysia of mixed-marriages or of their offsprings. There are many racial groups in Malaysia, namely, Malays, Chinese, Indians, Dayaks, and a number of other smaller groups and there is no law prohibiting inter-ethnic marriages per se. The offspring of any inter-ethnic marriages are classified according to the ethnic identity of the father. Muslims, the majority of whom are ethnic Malays, are required by Shariah to marry only Muslims. As a result those intending to marry a Muslim are required to convert to Islam. Islam in Malaysia is a state religion and conversion subjects the individual to Shariah law, which incidentally makes it a crime to apostasize further. The offspring of such unions are automatically Muslims and their ethnicity may be classified as Malay and so they may avail themselves of the privileges that being a Malay in Malaysia comes with. The Malays have conceptualized this as "masuk Melayu". This is often seen in certain quarters as a conflict with the Constitutional provision guaranteeing freedom of religion but it has not stopped many non-Malays from marrying Malays. Among other races, the only hindrance to inter-racial marriages is not legal but rather cultural. Despite the fact that Malaysian politics is aligned along racial lines, the general climate of modern Malaysia is such that inter-racial marriage is a growing trend.

Europe

Iberian Peninsula

After the Umayyad conquest of Hispania in the 8th century, the Islamic state of Al-Andalus was established in the Iberian Peninsula, where it was common for Arab and Berber males from North Africa to intermarry with the local Visigothic, Suebi, Latin and Iberian females of Hispania.[26][27] The offspring of such marriages were known as muladi or Muwallad, an Arabic term still used in the modern Arab world to refer to people with an Arab parent and a non-Arab parent.[28] This term was also the origin for the shared Spanish and Portuguese word mulato.[29][30]

By the 11th or 12th century, the Muslim population of Al-Andalus had merged into a homogeneous group of people known as Moors. After the Reconquista, which was completed in 1492, most of the Moors were forced to either flee to Morocco or convert to Christianity (there is also a significant Sephardic Jewish community in Morocco). Crypto-Muslims, Muslims converted to Christianity and their descendants were known as moriscos while Crypto-Jews, converted Jews and their descendants were known as marranos, and they were often targeted by the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions as suspects of heresy on the basis of being suspects of secretly keeping their Islamic or Jewish faiths. There was also an official racial discrimination system called limpieza de sangre or limpeza de sangue.

However, in spite of the religious and ethnic persecution, there were never any anti-miscegenation laws implemented in the Peninsula. Crypto-Jews and Crypto-Muslims would also flee to Latin America and the Caribbean, where they would enjoy greater social and political acceptance, and greater freedom to their religious practices e.g. the first synagogue in Brazil was build up in the mid-17th century during the Dutch rule on Northeastern Brazil, and the common populace was not used to denunciate different religious practices (except some Afro-Brazilian religions, such as Quimbanda, deemed as witchcraft) to the Portuguese authorities. Now, such elements are sometimes celebrated in the modern secular culture by liberal persons as part of the Histories of both the Peninsula and the new developing culturally pluralistic societies of the New World.

France

In 1723, 1724 and 1774 several administrative acts forbade interracial marriages, mainly in colonies. But it's not clear if these acts were lawful. On 2 May 1746, Paris parliament validated an interracial marriage.[31]

Under the King Louis XVI, the Order of the Council of State of 5 April 1778, signed by Antoine de Sartine, forbade "whites of either sex to contract marriage with blacks, mulattos or other people of color" in the Kingdom, as the number of blacks has increased so much in France, mostly in the capital.[32] Nevertheless it was an interracial marriage prohibition, not an interracial sex prohibition. Moreover it was an administrative act, not a law. There was never any racial law about marriage in France,[33] with exception of French Louisiana.[34] But some restricted rules were applied about heritage and nobility. In any case, nobles needed King's authorization for their marriage.

On 20 September 1792, all restrictions regarding interracial marriage were canceled.[35] On 8 January 1803, a governmental circular forbade marriages between Whites and Negress or Negroes and White women.[36] But by 1804 the Napoleonic code didn't mentioned anything specific about interracial marriage. In 1806 a French court validated an interracial marriage.[37] In 1818 the highest French court (cour de cassation) validated a marriage contracted in New York between a white man and a colored woman.[38] All administrative prohibitions were canceled by the law in 1833.[39]

During World War I, there were 135,000 soldiers from British India,[40] a large number of soldiers from French North Africa,[41] and 20,000 labourers from South Africa,[42] who served in France. Much of the French male population had gone to war, leaving behind a surplus of French females,[43] many of whom formed interracial relationships with non-white soldiers, mainly Indian[44][45] and North African.[40] British and French authorities allowed foreign Muslim soldiers to intermarry with local French females on the basis of Islamic law, which allows marriage between Muslim males and Christian and Jewish females. On the other hand, Hindu soldiers in France were restricted from intermarriage on the basis of the Indian caste system and their free will.[45]

While the French were not as concerned about interracial relationships, the British made attempts to prevent their Indian troops from engaging in such relationships with white females, by implementing curfews and preventing female nurses from looking after wounded Indian troops in British-run hospitals.[41] On the other hand, French-run hospitals had no problem with having female nurses looking after wounded Indian and North African soldiers, though contacts with black African labourers and soldiers were more severely restricted by both British and French authorities.[40][46]

United Kingdom

Following World War I, there was a large surplus of females in the United Kingdom,[47] and there were increasing numbers of seamen arriving from the Indian subcontinent, Arab World, Far East and Caribbean. This led to increased intermarriage and cohabitation with local white females, which raised concerns over miscegenation and led to several race riots at the time.[48] In the 1920s to 1940s, several legal scholars raised concerns about an increasing mixed-breed population, mainly the product of marriages between Arab men and white women.[49] They denounced white girls who mixed with foreign Muslim men as 'shameless' and called for a legislative ban on the breeding of 'half-caste' children. These calls for anti-miscegenation laws were unsuccessful, however.[50]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ The existence of an Aryan race and other non-Aryan races as conceived and categorised by Nazism was an arbitrary and unscientific figment of Nazi racism.
  2. ^ US Holocaust Memorial Museum, Nuremberg Laws: Nazi Racial Policy 1935 [dead link]
  3. ^ Beate Meyer, Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der Hamburger Juden 1933-1945, Landeszentrale für politische Bildung (ed.), Hamburg: Landeszentrale für politische Bildung, 2006, p. 80. ISBN 3-929728-85-0
  4. ^ Before 1933 the term Mischehe referred to interfaith marriages, which was a tax office phenomenon. German tax offices deducted Church tax from taxpayers, enrolled with a religious body, with the general tax collection by a surcharge on the income tax and then transferred it to the respective religious body. Interfaith mixed marriages, who were taxed as a unit, would have the charged church tax halved among the two respective religious bodies. Mostly the Roman Catholic Church, the respective Protestant regional church bodies and the Jewish congregations (in their case ending by Nazi act in March 1938) collected contributions from their members by way of church tax. Since the Nazis gave the term Mischehe a new meaning the tax offices were ordered to change their terminology to konfessionsverschiedene Ehe (English: denominationally different marriage). Cf. Cornelia Schmitz-Berning, Vokabular des Nationalsozialismus, Berlin et al.: de Gruyter, 1998, p. 409. ISBN 3-11-013379-2
  5. ^ By the "Gesetz zur Vereinheitlichung des Rechts der Eheschließung und der Ehescheidung (EheG)" ("Act on standardisation of the law of contraction and divorce of marriages", as of 6 July 1938) divorce on so-called racial grounds was enabled. Cf. Reichsgesetzblatt (RGBl., i.e. the Reich's law gazette) 1938 I, p. 807, § 37 EheG (Bedeutungsirrtum), cf. also Alexandra Przyrembel, "Rassenschande": Reinheitsmythos und Vernichtungslegitimation im Nationalsozialismus, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003, (Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geschichte; vol. 190), p. 86 (ISBN 3-525-35188-7) or – as to contesting or dissolving a marriage – see Bernhard Müller, Alltag im Zivilisationsbruch: Das Ausnahme-Unrecht gegen die jüdische Bevölkerung in Deutschland 1933–1945; eine rechtstatsächliche Untersuchung des Sonderrechts und seiner Folgewirkungen auf den "Alltag" der Deutschen jüdischer Abstammung und jüdischen Bekenntnisses, Munich: Allitera-Verlag, 2003, simultaneously Bielefeld, Univ., Diss., 2002, pp. 344-348. ISBN 3-935877-68-4
  6. ^ Based on an evaluation of divorce decrees, however restricted to only one former Reichsgau, the discriminations and easements caused a divorce rate of mixed marriages 20% above the general average. Many divorces followed after the couple succeeded in achieving a visa and thus emigration for the Jewish-classified spouse, so the divorce would lift the discriminations hitting the Aryan-classified spouse, who stayed at home. Cf. Beate Meyer, 'Jüdische Mischlinge' – Rassenpolitik und Verfolgungserfahrung 1933–1945 (11999), Hamburg: Dölling und Galitz, (12002), (Studien zur jüdischen Geschichte; vol. 6), simultaneously Hamburg, Univ., Diss., 1998, ISBN 3-933374-22-7
  7. ^ This was maintained by the pre-1939 practice of Jewish congregations in Germany, which denied Jewesses, who married Gentiles, to be precise non-converts to Judaism, to keep their membership in a congregation. This turned the Jewesses, if they did not convert to another faith, legally into irreligionists. While Jews marrying Gentile women could (stay) enroll(ed) as member of a Jewish congregation.
  8. ^ Beate Meyer, "Geschichte im Film. Judenverfolgung, Mischehen und der Protest in der Rosenstraße 1943", in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. 52 (2004), pp. 23-36, footnote 23 on p. 28. ISSN 0044-2828. Some historians judge this intervention of Göring as a tactical measurement, in order not to arouse protests by so-called Aryan kinship, since after secret service reports the government organised November Pogrom in 1938 the regime did not feel so safe about the public's opinion on further anti-Semitic discriminations. Cf. Ursula Büttner, "Die Verfolgung der christlich-jüdischen «Mischfamilien»", In: Ursula Büttner, Die Not der Juden teilen. Christlich-jüdische Familien im Dritten Reich. Beispiel und Zeugnis des Schriftstellers Robert Brendel, Hamburg: Christians, 1988, p. 44. ISBN 3-7672-1055-X
  9. ^ Cf. Reichsgesetzblatt (RGBl., i.e. the Reich's law gazette) 1939 I, 864 § 7 law text
  10. ^ a b Beate Meyer, Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der Hamburger Juden 1933-1945, Landeszentrale für politische Bildung (ed.), Hamburg: Landeszentrale für politische Bildung, 2006, p. 83. ISBN 3-929728-85-0
  11. ^ Meldungen aus dem Reich: Auswahl aus den geheimen Lageberichten des Sicherheitsdienstes der SS 1939–1944 (11965; Reports from the Reich: Selection from the secret reviews of the situation of the SS 1939-1944; 1984 extended to 14 vols.), Heinz Boberach (ed. and compilator), Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag (dtv), 21968, (dtv-dokumente; vol. 477) p. 208. ISBN B0000BSLXR
  12. ^ The earlier deportations of Jews and Gentiles of Jewish descent from Austria and Pomerania Province (both to occupied Poland) as well as Baden and the Palatinate (both to occupied France) had remained a spontaneous episode.
  13. ^ At the Wannsee Conference the participants decided to include persons classified as Jews, but married to persons classified as Aryans, however, only after a divorce. In October 1943 an act, facilitating compulsory divorce imposed by the state, was ready for appointment, however, Hitler never granted the competent referees an audience. Pressure by the NSDAP headquarters in early 1944 also failed. Cf. Uwe Dietrich Adam, Judenpolitik im Dritten Reich, Düsseldorf: 2003, pp. 222-234. ISBN 3-7700-4063-5
  14. ^ In summer 1945 all in all 8,000 Berliners, whom the Nazis had classified as Jews because of 3 or 4 grandparents survived. Their personal faith – like Jewish, Protestant, Catholic or irreligionist – is mostly not recorded, since only the Nazi files report on them, which use the Nazi racial definitions. 4,700 out of the 8,000 survived due to their living in a mixed marriage. 1,400 survived hiding, out of 5,000 who tried. 1,900 had returned from Theresienstadt. Cf. Hans-Rainer Sandvoß, Widerstand in Wedding und Gesundbrunnen, Gedenkstätte Deutscher Widerstand (ed.), Berlin: Gedenkstätte Deutscher Widerstand, 2003, (Schriftenreihe über den Widerstand in Berlin von 1933 bis 1945; No. 14), p. 302. ISSN 0175-3592
  15. ^ Cf. the Bundesgesetz über die Anerkennung freier Ehen (as of 23 June 1950, Federal law on recognition of free marriages).
  16. ^ Beate Meyer, 'Jüdische Mischlinge' – Rassenpolitik und Verfolgungserfahrung 1933–1945 (11999), Hamburg: Dölling und Galitz, (12002), (Studien zur jüdischen Geschichte; vol. 6), simultaneously Hamburg, Univ., Diss., 1998, p. 469. ISBN 3-933374-22-7
  17. ^ Rita M. Byrnes, ed. (1996), "Legislative Implementation of Apartheid", South Africa: A Country Study, Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, retrieved 2008-01-04
  18. ^ Cairo court rules on Egyptians married to Israeli women, BBC, 5 June 2010, retrieved 2010-10-19
  19. ^ Saudi Marriage, US Department of State, retrieved 2010-10-19
  20. ^ Controversial civil union bill up for discussion, Haaretz
  21. ^ Gernet, Jacques (1996), A History of Chinese Civilization (2 ed.), Cambridge University Press, p. 294, ISBN 978-0-521-49781-7
  22. ^ a b Chinese of Arab and Persian descent, ColorQ World, retrieved 2008-12-23
  23. ^ Israeli, Raphael (2002), Islam in China, United States of America: Lexington Books, p. 285, ISBN 0-7391-0375-X
  24. ^ Beckman, Karen Redrobe (2003), Vanishing Women: Magic, Film, and Feminism, Duke University Press, pp. 31–3, ISBN 0-8223-3074-1
  25. ^ Constitution of India in English, Part XIX., Art.366(2): " 'an Anglo-Indian' means a person whose father or any of whose other male progenitors in the male line is or was of European descent but who is domiciled within the territory of India and is or was born within such territory of parents habitually resident therein and not established there for temporary purposes only;".
  26. ^ Thomas F. Glick, Islamic and Christian Spain in the Early Middle Ages
  27. ^ Ivan van Sertima (1992), Golden Age of the Moor, Transaction Publishers, ISBN 1-56000-581-5
  28. ^ Kees Versteegh, et al. Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics, BRILL, 2006.
  29. ^ Izquierdo Labrado, Julio, La esclavitud en Huelva y Palos (1570-1587) (in Spanish), retrieved 2008-07-14
  30. ^ Salloum, Habeeb, The impact of the Arabic language and culture on English and other European languages, The Honorary Consulate of Syria, retrieved 2008-07-14
  31. ^ M. Allemand in "Traité du Mariage", imprimerie E. Leboyer (Riom France, 1847) p.129
  32. ^ Arrest du Conseil d'état du Roi concernant les mariages des noirs, mulâtres, ou autres gens de couleur, du 5 avril 1778 (Lille: NJB Peterinck-Cramé, 1778).
  33. ^ {fr} Pétition des hommes de couleur de la Martinique et de la Guadeloupe, Impriperie E. Duverger, Paris (feb. 1829), p. 8-9
  34. ^ Louisiana code, art.
  35. ^ Law of September 20th, 1792
  36. ^ Archives nationales (henceforward A.N.) BB15–211, R4, no 3266
  37. ^ Allemand 1847, p. 130
  38. ^ Sir Beguin and Emilie born slave in Guadeloupe—Allemand 1847, p. 131
  39. ^ Law of April 24th, 1833
  40. ^ a b c Enloe, Cynthia H. (2000), Maneuvers: The International Politics of Militarizing Women's Lives, University of California Press, p. 61, ISBN 0-520-22071-4
  41. ^ a b Greenhut, Jeffrey (April 1981), "Race, Sex, and War: The Impact of Race and Sex on Morale and Health Services for the Indian Corps on the Western Front, 1914", Military Affairs, 45 (2), Society for Military History: 71–74, doi:10.2307/1986964, JSTOR 1986964
  42. ^ Levine, Philippa (1998), "Battle Colors: Race, Sex, and Colonial Soldiery in World War I", Journal of Women's History, 9
  43. ^ Greenhut, Jeffrey (April 1981), "Race, Sex, and War: The Impact of Race and Sex on Morale and Health Services for the Indian Corps on the Western Front, 1914", Military Affairs, 45 (2), Society for Military History: 71–74 [72–4], doi:10.2307/1986964, JSTOR 1986964
  44. ^ Dowling, Timothy C. (2006), Personal Perspectives: World War I, ABC-CLIO, pp. 35–6, ISBN 1-85109-565-9
  45. ^ a b Omissi, David (2007), "Europe Through Indian Eyes: Indian Soldiers Encounter England and France, 1914–1918", English Historical Review, CXXII (496), Oxford University Press: 371–96, doi:10.1093/ehr/cem004
  46. ^ Bland, Lucy (April 2005), "White Women and Men of Colour: Miscegenation Fears in Britain after the Great War", Gender & History, 17 (1): 29–61 [34–5], doi:10.1111/j.0953-5233.2005.00371.x
  47. ^ Ansari, Humayun (2004), The Infidel Within: The History of Muslims in Britain, 1800 to the Present, C. Hurst & Co. Publishers, p. 94, ISBN 1-85065-685-1
  48. ^ Bland, Lucy (April 2005), "White Women and Men of Colour: Miscegenation Fears in Britain after the Great War", Gender & History, 17 (1): 29–61, doi:10.1111/j.0953-5233.2005.00371.x
  49. ^ Ansari 2004, p. 98
  50. ^ Ansari 2004, pp. 93–94
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anti-miscegenation_laws&oldid=500309099"