• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Elizabeth Warren part Native American?

Is Elizabeth Warren part Native American?


  • Total voters
    78
Embracing heritage for personal gain or distancing oneself from heritage for personal gain. It is personal choice.
 
Embracing heritage for personal gain or distancing oneself from heritage for personal gain. It is personal choice.

Agreed, that's what tres hasn't understood yet. Ludmya Bordeau Love, John McCain, Piyush Jindal, Barack Hussein Obama, Elizabeth Warren they all made decisions regarding their heritage, nationalities, backgrounds etc. Whatever reasons were behind these decisions, they are normal for minorities. Elizabeth Warren believed she was a minority because her family had told her so. She wouldn't be the first person to make a decision based on family lore. Her integrity is not questionable because of those choices.
 
That is irrelevant to the point being made. Ludmya Bordeau Love is under no requirement to use her husband's name, or shorten Ludmya and discard Bordeau. Those were personal decisions which had the effect of distancing her from her ethnic heritage. However, they don't call her integrity into question anymore than Warren identifying with NA ancestry because of family lore. Do you not get this yet? Is this too tedious for you? I can give you books on this issue.

No woman is under a legal requirement to take her husband's name. Most of us do it.

Nobody is under any requirement to use a nickname. Many people do it.

Nicknames and women using their husband's last names legally have nothing to do with what people on this thread are arguing about Elizabeth Warren.

PS When I added my husband's Swedish last name legally when I married him, I stopped being called by my German maiden name. I'm still of German heritage. Nobody is questioning my integrity for using my husband's name because I did what most women did - just like Mia Love did. No integrity is being questioned when a woman takes her husband's name. Did your mother retain her maiden name or did she call herself "Mrs. X"? If she used your father's name, did you question her integrity?

Have a great day.
 
Embracing heritage for personal gain or distancing oneself from heritage for personal gain. It is personal choice.

Absolutely. So do you think Warren used her heritage for personal gain? That's what a lot of people seem to think happen. I haven't seen any evidence of her personally gaining from her claim of NA ancestry. Apparently the only one who gained from it was Harvard, unless there's something that hasn't been reported.
 
No woman is under a legal requirement to take her husband's name. Most of us do it.

Yes, and in Ludmya Bordeau Love's case, it had the effect of further distancing her from her ethnic origins. Again, it does not call into question her integrity. It is a personal decision which is outside of politics. Just like Elizabeth Warren believing she was NA and identifying herself as such because of family lore. I'm thinking you're not too good at this understanding concepts thing.
 
Yes, and in Ludmya Bordeau Love's case, it had the effect of further distancing her from her ethnic origins. Again, it does not call into question her integrity. It is a personal decision which is outside of politics. Just like Elizabeth Warren believing she was NA and identifying herself as such because of family lore. I'm thinking you're not too good at this understanding concepts thing.

Mia Love had no choice on her husband's last name. She did what most women do and took her husband's last name.

But that has nothing to do with Elizabeth Warren and some people claiming she gained from her ancestry.

Happy Tuesday!
 
Mia Love had no choice on her husband's last name.

Ummm of course she did. There is no legal requirement to take a husband's name. However, whether she had a choice or not would still irrelevant. It is part of her distancing herself from her ethnic origins. However these are decisions based on a person's understanding of their racial identity. Likewise, Elizabeth Warren's decision to believe her family's claims on ethnic ancestry does not challenge her integrity either. That you continue to ignore this point is your problem. Not mine.

Many people are under the assumption that a woman must legally change her last name to her husband's last name. This is not the case. She is free to keep her own name, hyphenate her name with her husband's name, take her husband's name, or come up with a completely different name. If the couple agrees, they can even adopt the woman's last name. As long as the name change is not done criminally or fraudulently, any of these options would constitute a legal name change. Before considering changing your name after marriage, be sure you are happy with whatever name you choose. - See more at: Changing Your Name after Marriage - FindLaw
 
Absolutely. So do you think Warren used her heritage for personal gain? That's what a lot of people seem to think happen. I haven't seen any evidence of her personally gaining from her claim of NA ancestry. Apparently the only one who gained from it was Harvard, unless there's something that hasn't been reported.

I think she embraced what she believed to be her heritage and checked a box.

I think she is an intelligent talented woman (whether you believe in her politics or not) and she would not need such a crutch to get a job.
 
I think she embraced what she believed to be her heritage and checked a box.

I think she is an intelligent talented woman (whether you believe in her politics or not) and she would not need such a crutch to get a job.

She deserved her job. She taught bankruptcy law at Harvard and from all accounts, she is one of the best bankruptcy lawyers this country has seen. She didn't need the NA thing to get the job which is why I personally don't believe she benefitted from it. Harvard, yes...they filled a quota number.

She's intelligent. I find her politics abhorrent. But I disagree with the people who think she intentionally used the NA thing for personal gain.
 
Ummm of course she did. There is no legal requirement to take a husband's name. However, whether she had a choice or not would still irrelevant. It is part of her distancing herself from her ethnic origins. However these are decisions based on a person's understanding of their racial identity. Likewise, Elizabeth Warren's decision to believe her family's claims on ethnic ancestry does not challenge her integrity either. That you continue to ignore this point is your problem. Not mine.

I said she had no choice on her husband's last name. He came with it. If it was of the same ethnicity that her maiden name was, she would retain a last name with the same ethnicity. And like most women, she took her husband's name legally, which has nothing to do with ethnicity - hers or his. It's practicality, for the children, societal, and what most women do. Nobody that I'm aware of has ever questioned why a woman takes her husband's last name when they marry, or imply that it was done for racial identity purposes. And she's not white anyway, name aside.

Have a great day!
 
I said she had no choice on her husband's last name.

Of course she did as she was under no requirement to take it. What most women do is irrelevant. :shrug: What part of this do you not get yet? That it's the effect of those decisions that matter and whatever way you slice it, they do not question that person's integrity? Are you looking for things to argue about?
 
I think she embraced what she believed to be her heritage and checked a box.

I think she is an intelligent talented woman (whether you believe in her politics or not) and she would not need such a crutch to get a job.

Let me see, an intelligent, talented woman:

-Not only believes she has a certain ethnic heritage based on heresay, but she believes that she has that heritage in the fullest sense (identified herself as "native american", not "of partial native american descent".
-Apparently only self identifies as being of this background when seeking employment. Not surprisingly, truly being of this back ground can be beneficial in obtaining employment.

and we are supposed to believe that it was all an innocent "mistake"?

Heck, my parents and grandparents have assured me that I am an indigenous person*. I am also a native of the United States. The next time I complete a questionaire for employment, I am checking.... "Native American". If questioned, I"ll jsut say that I "misunderstood" what was being asked.

*In fact, I am an indigenous person. My immediate tribal relatives, and myself just have not resided in our uhmm..... "traditional ancestoral tribal homeland" (eastern Europe) for uhmmm..... quite sometime.
 
Last edited:
Of course she did as she was under no requirement to take it. What most women do is irrelevant. :shrug: What part of this do you not get yet? That it's the effect of those decisions that matter and whatever way you slice it, they do not question that person's integrity? Are you looking for things to argue about?

You're absolutely right. Until you, I've never met or heard of anyone in my life questioning a woman's integrity for taking her husband's last name when she got married.

I have heard of and seen people questioning lies on job applications before. That's a common occurrence. Of course there is no evidence that Warren intentionally lied or didn't believe she was not NA, just as there is no evidence that she benefitted from the notion of her being part NA. People question what they perceive to be intentional lies for personal gain all the time. That of course is why the example of Mia Love taking her husband's name when she married him is not relevant to the discussion of Elizabeth Warren and this situation.

Hope your day is good.
 
You're absolutely right. Until you, I've never met or heard of anyone in my life questioning a woman's integrity for taking her husband's last name when she got married.

Your strawman arguments are see through. I've never once questioned anybody's integrity for decisions concerning ethnic heritage. As a matter of fact, I've stated that those decisions have no relation to a person's integrity over and over again. Nice try?

I have heard of and seen people questioning lies on job applications before. That's a common occurrence. Of course there is no evidence that Warren intentionally lied or didn't believe she was not NA, just as there is no evidence that she benefitted from the notion of her being part NA. People question what they perceive to be intentional lies for personal gain all the time. That of course is why the example of Mia Love taking her husband's name when she married him is not relevant to the discussion of Elizabeth Warren and this situation.

Still nonsensical. Warren identified herself as a NA because of her family lore. Her decisions were made because of her views on ethnic heritage. In the same way, Ludmya Bordeau Love's decisions were based on her views of ethnic heritage. Do you realize why they both fall within the context of decisions made due to personal views on ethnicity yet? Or not? If you don't, admit you don't and move on. :shrug:
 
If she's proven part Native American and wants to incorporate that into her ethnic heritage/identity then that's not my business to say she can't. It could be purely for political reasons but if she's part Native American she can identify how she pleases.
 
If she's proven part Native American and wants to incorporate that into her ethnic heritage/identity then that's not my business to say she can't. It could be purely for political reasons but if she's part Native American she can identify how she pleases.

Agreed, with exception to the "if she's proven..." bit. If I were her, I would take a DNA test, but for purely personal reasons and not in some misguided attempt to politically appease my detractors who'll hate me regardless of any decision I make (because it's fairly obvious from this thread that her detractors don't really give a crap about whether or not she's Native American). It is one thing to believe what my grandparents tell me, but if pushed to provide documentation and am unable to do so, I would out of personal curiosity want to find out the truth behind my lineage. However, my opinion should in no way be mistaken with any demand to satisfy anybody else's curiosity as it's none of their business.
 
Last edited:
Your strawman arguments are see through. I've never once questioned anybody's integrity for decisions concerning ethnic heritage. As a matter of fact, I've stated that those decisions have no relation to a person's integrity over and over again. Nice try?



Still nonsensical. Warren identified herself as a NA because of her family lore. Her decisions were made because of her views on ethnic heritage. In the same way, Ludmya Bordeau Love's decisions were based on her views of ethnic heritage. Do you realize why they both fall within the context of decisions made due to personal views on ethnicity yet? Or not? If you don't, admit you don't and move on. :shrug:

No, Mia Love changed her name because she fell in love and got married, not because of he views on her ethnicity.
 
Agreed, with exception to the "if she's proven..." bit. If I were her, I would take a DNA test, but for purely personal reasons and not in some misguided attempt to politically appease my detractors who'll hate me regardless of any decision I make (because it's fairly obvious from this thread that her detractors don't really give a crap about whether or not she's Native American). It is one thing to believe what my grandparents tell me, but if pushed to provide documentation and am unable to do so, I would out of personal curiosity want to find out the truth behind my lineage. However, my opinion should in no way be mistaken with any demand to satisfy anybody else's curiosity as it's none of their business.

I'd also take the DNA test but only out of curiosity.
 
I'd also take the DNA test but only out of curiosity.

I did in fact take a DNA test, and found out all the "lore" was true. Not that it was particularly extraordinary (no surprise Polynesian or Mongolian was uncovered or anything, and no, I'm not a descendent of Napolean), but it was true just the same.
 
I did in fact take a DNA test, and found out all the "lore" was true. Not that it was particularly extraordinary (no surprise Polynesian or Mongolian was uncovered or anything, and no, I'm not a descendent of Napolean), but it was true just the same.

Interesting. What did it show was in your background?
 
If she's proven part Native American and wants to incorporate that into her ethnic heritage/identity then that's not my business to say she can't. It could be purely for political reasons but if she's part Native American she can identify how she pleases.

When was the last time she brought this up - other than responding to the brouhaha caused by political operatives (etc)?
 
Mia Love's husband's name is Jason Love. That's why she "discarded her clearly French last name. I discarded my clearly German last name when I married my Irish/Swedish husband. That's what most women do when they marry..

No, no. Her legal name is Ludmya Bordeau Love. She goes by Mia Love. Again, a decision which no matter the circumstances distance her from her ethnic heritage. However, it doesn't call into question her integrity either. Do you get this yet? How a person decides to address their ethnic heritage does not call into question their integrity. It is a personal decision which has nothing to do with their actual politics

Most women, in our culture, on getting married, have their names legally changed so that they first name is that of their husband. It's not mandatory, of course, but it is the most accepted convention, and most conform to it. Are you claiming that Mrs. Love did not do so?
 
That is irrelevant to the point being made. Ludmya Bordeau Love is under no requirement to use her husband's name, or shorten Ludmya and discard Bordeau. Those were personal decisions which had the effect of distancing her from her ethnic heritage.

You seem to be making assumptions not supported by evidence.

As stated, it is the accepted convention for a woman, on marrying, to legally have her last name changed to that of her husband. Some women keep their maiden name as a middle name, and some do not.

Nothing to do with “distancing herself from her ethnic heritage”.

And it's a very common convention to go by a shortened “nickname” based on one's full legal first name, especially when the first name is more than two syllables. “Mia” is certainly an obvious and legitimate shortened form of “Ludmya”.

Again, nothing to do with “distancing herself from her ethnic heritage”.
 
Most women, in our culture, on getting married, have their names legally changed so that they first name is that of their husband. It's not mandatory, of course, but it is the most accepted convention, and most conform to it. Are you claiming that Mrs. Love did not do so?

Read that again and tell me how you arrived at the conclusion. "Mia Love" did more than take her husband's name. She shortened her first name and has ignored the fact that legally she also has her original ethnic sounding name. Again, this doesn't call into question her integrity. However, it is a personal decision as much as Warren deciding to consider herself NA based on family lore.
 
No, Mia Love changed her name because she fell in love and got married, not because of he views on her ethnicity.

Does she no longer use her legal name Bordeau because she fell in love? Nonsense. I married a person with a very similar culture to that of Haitians and she took on my name and kept hers as well. "Mia Love" distanced herself from her ethnic background in the same manner that "Bobby" Jindal did. However, these are normal things for people raised in countries where they are minorities. They're as normal as considering yourself to be of an ethnicity based on family lore.
 
Back
Top Bottom