Worth quoting: Chris Kluwe

Chris Kluwe, kicker for the Minnesota Vikings, has refuted the illogical arguments of an opponent of marriage equality in Minnesota, specifically the opponent’s invoking of “traditional marriage”. Kluwe wrote:

Which version of “traditional marriage” would you like to use Mr. Balling? Should we go back to ancient Israel and practice polygamy, with a woman’s only right that to own her own tent? Or should we use the ancient Greek definition of marriage, one more concerned with inheritance than love or procreation, one that would force a woman to divorce her current husband and marry a sibling if that was required to continue the family? Should we force a brother to marry his dead sibling’s wife? Or perhaps we should make arranged marriages with child brides, that’s certainly traditional enough. Wait, I know, let’s go with the one where you have to pay three goats and a cow in order to ensure the woman is yours to keep forever, and you can stone her to death if she cheats on you. That one sounds terrific!

You see, Mr. Balling, since you don’t actually provide a definition of what “traditional marriage” is, I think your definition of “traditional marriage” boils down to “I want to make other people who believe differently than I do miserable by taking away their free will so I’ll cloak my hate in the guise of ‘tradition’ and ‘history’ without knowing what those words really mean”, and, well, I’m not really ok with that. Also, “traditional marriage” has traditionally been rather tough on 50% of the human population, what with the whole enslavement and forced child bearing and stoning to death thing (I’m talking about women if you haven’t figured it out (sorry to the people who figured it out like 5 minutes ago but I wanted to make sure he got it)), and I’m not really ok with that either.

It’s pretty obvious that all arguments against marriage equality are based on particular religious views, so it’s not surprising that our opponents use the phrase “traditional marriage” in their favourite arguments. As Kluwe points out, however, there are many traditions in marriage. Actually, many of those different traditions are still practiced in the world.

Our more extreme opponents bizarrely declare that marriage equality will “destroy” (or, at least, “end”) opposite-gender marriage. Our less extreme opponents instead claim that marriage equality will somehow “undermine” opposite-gender marriages. Most mainstream people know without even thinking about it how silly these arguments are, but, for the rest, it’s good to show how illogical our opponents’ arguments are, as well as how historically and culturally inaccurate they are to practically claim copyright over the phrase “traditional marriage”.

The real truth is that marriage is more than the narrow definition given to it by some conservative religionists—it means far more than they assert. Marriage equality will strengthen marriage not just through ensuring equality of all citizens, but by encouraging all loving couples, same-gender and opposite-gender alike, to make lifelong commitments. That’s a tradition worth fostering.

Tip o’ the Hat to Joe.My.God.