Stirring quotes from Loving v. Virginia to include in your ceremony #Ceremony Advice#ceremony#ceremony script#couples of color#readings March 6 | Catherine Clark bijouxandbits A world where this wedding couldn't happen? Never again.Photo by Lindsey Thorne We plucked some amazing nuggets from Obergefell v. Hodges (the SCOTUS marriage equality case in which the Court held that the right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples under the Constitution) recently to include in your wedding ceremony. This time around we're focusing on Loving v. Virginia, another landmark SCOTUS decision that invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage in 1967 (recently made into a movie). Related Post 5 best quotes from the marriage equality decision to use in your ceremony While we still have so far to go and so many potential obstacles in our path, I wanted to call out some ways to include... Read more Where would the nation (and us?!) be without our couples of color. This decision even has a special day called Loving Day, the anniversary of the decision on June 12. In this political climate, we want to call out all opportunities to bring light to the struggles of those who have fought for marriage equality in all ways. Here are some amazing quotes from Loving v. Virginia to include in your ceremony… Photograph of Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving dated June 12, 1967 | Photo via Wikipedia Best quotes from Loving v. Virginia: Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man', fundamental to our very existence and survival. …Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State. These convictions must be reversed. This case presents a constitutional question never addressed by this Court: whether a statutory scheme adopted by the State of Virginia to prevent marriages between persons solely on the basis of racial classifications violates the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. For reasons which seem to us to reflect the central meaning of those constitutional commands, we conclude that these statutes cannot stand. And the best response… Forty years after the court's decision, Mildred Loving released a statement that we really loved, too: I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about. Doing good while getting wed: wedding charity ideas to support your favorite causes "In lieu of a gift registry, what are some of the options/ideas to ask people to give to charity? My partner and I met volunteering and are passionate about that… Read More Reporter Name * Reporter Email * Original text Enter the original text here. Edited text* Enter your suggested copyedit here. Notes You can add a note for the editor here. * Required information. Fix Typo Catherine Clark Catherine Clark is Offbeat Bride's Senior Editor. In her spare time she loiters at her local library, makes art, watches movies en masse, plays video and tabletop games, poorly cooks healthy things, cuddles with her feline fur baby, and blogs at BijouxandBits.com. @enidjcoleslaw @bijouxandbits @bijouxandbits PREVIOUS S'mores, archery, cowboy chic at this rustic campfire wedding NEXT Vault Boy approves of these gamers' Fallout wedding Show/Hide comments [ 0 ] Join the conversation Cancel Reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment No-drama comment policy Part of what makes the Offbeat Empire different is our commitment to civil, constructive commenting. Make sure you're familiar with our no-drama comment policy. Biz owners & wedding bloggers Please just use your real name in your comment, not your business name or blog title. Our comments are not the place to pimp your website. If you want to promote your stuff on Offbeat Bride, join us as an advertiser instead.