The Daily Dish has a video of Mitt Romney talking about defending the traditional definition of marriage that’s existed for 3,000 years. In the case of Romney’s family, that traditional definition involved polygamy.
Romney says that we should not discard 3,000 years of history of one-man-one-woman marriage. Ahem. His own family were ardent polygamists only a century ago – and went to Mexican colonies to escape US federal oppression of their version of marriage (which also goes back a long, long way and still exists across the world). Romney’s great-grandparents were polygamists; one of his his great-great-grandfathers had twelve wives and was murdered by the husband of the twelfth.
For Romney to say that the definition of marriage has remained the same for 3,000 years is disproved by his own family. It’s untrue. False. A lie.
And let’s not forget that the traditional definition of marriage limited the sacrament to people of the same race, and treated women as chattel who couldn’t inherit property.
Why was it okay to change the definition of marriage for Mitt Romney’s Mormon ancestors a hundred years ago, and for people of color and whites in the late 1960s, but not for the rest of us today?