Wendy McElroy of iFeminists, while addressing a completely different issue than same-sex marriage, provides an excellent example of how “traditional marriage” is an empty, meaningless term:
Western jurisprudence has a long tradition of absolving husbands from the possibility of rape. The first significant discussion in America of forced sex within marriage being categorized as rape, and of the need for a legal remedy, may well have been “The Markland Letter,” which was published in 1887 in a Kansas newspaper.
…
The Markland letter became nationally notorious largely because its graphic description of violence left little doubt that the husband was a rapist despite the law.American law did not catch up with the Markland letter until 1976. Until then, rape laws throughout the states included a Marital Rape Exemption. In 1976, however, Nebraska became the first state to abolish that exemption.
Today, spousal rape is illegal in every state.
Say what you want about advocates of same-sex marriage and our reasoning, strategies and tactics. At least we’re intellectually honest. We don’t cloak our agenda with gobbledygook such as “traditional marriage” or “family values.” We want same-sex marriage, we want equal rights, we want an end to discrimination. Simple and straightforward.
But what, exactly, is it the opponents want? “Traditional marriage”? What’s that? Does that include a marital rape exemption? Does it include coverture? Does it include pre-arranged marriages? Does it include marriage to pre-teens?
Do they oppose the evolution of the definition of marriage as societal norms change? Is it always per se wrong in their opinion to change the marriage laws, to abandon “traditional marriage”?
Or do they define “traditional marriage” more narrowly, more precisely: “Traditional marriage is anything society may decide, today or in the future, so long as it excludes gays…”?
And, if that is indeed their definition of “traditional marriage,” then why are they so afraid to admit it?
Related Posts:
On the Polygamy Non-Argument
Professor: NY Gay Marriage Ruling Consistent with Legislative Intent
Thoughts on the New York Gay Marriage Decision
Gay Marriage: Any Lessons from the Boy Scouts?
Damn Right They’re Bigots
