As most Californians know,
Prop. 8 (the one that illegalized same sex marriage which had previously been legal)
has been on trial the past few months. Specifically, the plaintiffs are challenging the constitutional validity of the proposition (after all, with propositions in California, we can pass any law, as long as
x number of signatures get it on the ballot, and more than 50% of the voters think it's a good idea). More generally, the challenge seems to be getting at the question of whether the majority can vote away the rights of a minority.
One of the terms bandied about by opponents of marriage equality has been the term "traditional marriage". By "traditional marriage", opponents mean a marriage between exactly one man and one woman—and, sometimes, where both parties are of child-bearing age, are relatively close in age, and intend to procreate. One of the arguments of the anti-freedom folks is that if we allow homosexuals to marry, where, oh,
where will it end?! Pretty soon men will start having multiple wives, or there will be group marriages, or people will start marrying animals! Each of these (and more) were offered as serious arguments at one time or another, and people bought into them because each of these were seen as non-traditional marriages (as defined by the deep-pocketed opposition of same sex marriage).
That's why I found this article I read today so amusing. South Africa, in a huge leap forward for the continent (despite South Africa being probably the most whitewashed country in Africa), is hosting the upcoming
2010 World Cup. For those that don't follow soccer, the World Cup is one of the largest sporting events in the world, on par with the Summer Olympics, and might actually be more popular—an odd fact, considering it's a soccer-centric event, and the Olympics has a soccer tournament in it. The World Cup has never been held in Africa, so to say this is big for the country and the continent is an understatement: It's a prominent event in the recent history of Africa, and will be remembered hereafter no matter what happens.
And then
this happened. Apparently, South Africa's president, Jacob Zuma, who has three wives and a fiancée, was discovered to have impregnated a fifth woman. This is precisely the type of media coverage South Africa does
not need—or, at least, outside of Africa. Why would it matter? Here's where I tie the two themes of this post together (quote from the Yahoo! News article; my emphasis added):
While some South Africans see Zuma's polygamy as outdated, others applaud him for embracing what they see as traditional African values. South African law recognizes such traditional marriages, though fewer young people enter into them because they are seen as expensive and old-fashioned.
Traditional marriage?! You mean...the American Conservative definition of "traditional marriage" might not hold worldwide...? B-but...the Bible says...
Ha, ha! Ahh, I can't help it. Anyway, I'm sure this will just be a blip on the radar for South Africa (just like
all the poor folks they evicted to "beautify" the city of Johannesburg), and that marriage equality opponents either won't read or readily dismiss this "aberrant" usage of the term "traditional marriage", but it's here recorded for all to see.
Forever and ever.
As long as the internet exists.