tHeRes nO suCh ThINg aS SyStemIC rAciSM.
Cemetery board members say they will try to make a decision by Thursday night to resolve this issue.
Probably re-writing the by-laws and getting a unanimous vote. It sounds like something is being done.
6 Likes
I’d like to bring up the well-documented historical erasure of Black cemeteries in the U.S., which points to a larger issue in any potentially underinformed discussion of “why can’t the deceased be buried with other deceased family members in such-and-such cemetery” if the deceased is Black.
8 Likes
Thank you for this reminder.
I need it every day.
You are a good teacher.
5 Likes
How is this possibly legal?
For everyone asking “how is this legal,” laws only work if they are actively upheld and enforced.
Many civil rights laws have been and still are flat-out ignored in many places, all over the US (not just South of the Mason-Dixon.)
17 Likes
It’s not, as several posts here have already said.
It’s also beside the point.
10 Likes
In other news…
A new rest-stop opened in LA. It’s technically called “Oaklin Springs Cemetery in Oberlin” but feel free to use it as you will.
Exactly.
Organization Bylaws != Law. They are just “rules” for an organization to follow. The only people who would (could?) enforce this would be the internal members of the org.
3 Likes
What’s curious here is: the cemetery can legally discriminate on basis of religion if is run by a religious organization. (I wonder if it can also discriminate on other bases, like race.)
So, in your opinion, how many centuries left before it becomes publicly shameful to be openly racist? 2 more? 5 centuries? Or do we give racists a pass for the harms they cause others forever?
11 Likes
Not really curious no. Cemeteries that are public can’t discriminate. If they sell plots, they have to admit anyone. This would be covered by the civil rights act with regards to public accommodations, I’m guessing. A privately owned cemetery has more latitude, including those owned by churchs, etc. But if they sell to the public, they have to admit anyone.
But why someone who is not a part of a religion would be upset about not being allowed to be buried in the private cemetery of religious institution is beyond me… Same for a private family cemetery. 
It’s not remotely the same thing as systemic discrimination that created the concept of racially segregated burial. If you (assuming you’re white) can’t be buried next to that little church on the corner, you have plenty of other options for burial, including your local public cemetery. In racial segregation, your options for burial often precluded that for non-whites. Apples and buicks.
9 Likes
Fold the racism into the religion, and that should take care of it.
3 Likes
Roger that. It’s more of a general bafflement that someone would take on a position of power and not even read the damn rules. (And I’m case it’s obvious I’m not trying to minimize the overarching issue here - my rage isn’t zero sum 
)
3 Likes
I agree, provided they follow through. But I also agree with @smulder. The actual apology and commitment to action was unusually good. I support that.
However, a better response would be to go against the illegal by-laws and offer to either sell the widow a plot for her husband or give her one of his family’s own (I gather that was what he meant by one of my own)…to make it her choice, not his. At the end of the day, he still enforced an immoral and illegal rule, even though he tried to make up for it. Sometimes you just need to not follow orders that are wrong.
All that hopefully constructive criticism said, it does sound like he’s committed to officially removing the rule, which is also important. Provided, as I said, he and the board follow through and get it done ASAP.
Also, the tin-pot racist who remorselessly turned her away needs to be fired. As someone else said, the bell can’t be un-rung.
8 Likes
These days, woth this SCOTUS? Sincerely held religious beliefs are far more important than law.
If your religion says black people are second class citizens, the current SCOTUS is very likely to side with you.
4 Likes
I initially misread your comment as saying the existence of the rule was an invitation for a racist enforcer. Which, yup. Structural racism in a nutshell.
2 Likes
Which is why privatization and diminishing public resources are usually a form of sub-rosa segregation. (See Betsy DeVos’s education policy)
4 Likes
It was a poorly worded comment in anycase and I’m sure some people would take offense to my rhetoric in embarassing ways for me.
4 Likes
Many of the orgs have it in their by-laws that the by-laws are supposed to reviewed periodically. Also, def not doing their basic job if they don’t know the bylaws.
1 Like
