NFL player comes out in support of marriage in Minnesota

There’s some encouraging news coming out of the National Football League. And no, I’m not talking about the deal struck between the referees and the owners. I’m referring to the decision of Matt Birk – a six-time Pro Bowl selection, current center for the Baltimore Ravens, and the NFL’s 2012 Man of the Year – to speak out in support of an amendment that would define marriage in Minnesota as a union between one man and one woman.

His support of the amendment first came in the form of an editorial this past weekend for the Star Tribune, Minnesota’s largest newspaper. In his column, Birk warned that “marriage is in trouble right now.” Adding that “in the last few years, political forces and a culture of relativism have replaced ‘I am my brother’s keeper’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself’ with ‘live and let live’ and ‘if it feels good, go ahead and do it.’”

He’s since released a short video on the topic with the help of the Minnesota Catholic Conference.

Birk’s decision to speak out for marriage comes off the heels of several other NFL players coming out in favor of same sex unions.

His support for marriage, however, is shared by most Minnesotans. According to recent polls, 49% of voters support the amendment while 47% oppose it.

Matt deserves our support for speaking out on this issue. He knows full well that what he is doing makes him a target for marriage redefiners across the country. Thank you, Matt!

h/t Michael Blissenbach



  • Pingback: WednesdayâÂ?Â?s Religion News Roundup: Mormon moments, ElwayâÂ?Â?s endorsement, Clash of the Evangelicals | Religion News Service

  • SM

    Will we be seeing a post about his teammate, Chris Kluwe, who came out for gay marriage, right?

    • ifollowHATE

      SHHHH! It’s vital to make it appear as though no one in America supports gay marriage so that we can continue to pass these ballot measures. That’s why we don’t talk about the fact the 48.7% of Californian’s voted to to allow gay marriage almost four years ago and a similar number in Maine did as well. The tide has now turned and a majority of Americans support gay marriage, but if we admit that, we will lose the few people that we have that still support bigotry.

  • Francis Wippel

    Nice to see Birk take a courageous stand on this. It takes a great deal of intestinal fortitude to go public with a stance that will make you unpopular with the politically correct media culture. Birk has always been a good guy on and off the field.

    As we can see from some of the comments posted here, simply taking a stand to protect the traditional definition of marriage (one that predates every existing government on the face of the earth) will get you labeled a bigot and a hater in a New York minute. What is most insulting about this knee-jerk reaction on the part of the pro-gay marriage crowd is their insinuation that belief in the traditional definition of marriage can only be rooted in hatred of homosexuals, rather than in a desire to protect a millenniums old institution from being reduced to civil rights status, and have it constantly open to redefinition in every age based on societal whim.

    Know this; if marriage ends up being redefined, that redefinition process will never end. There will be no basis to outlaw polygamy or any other form of marriage someone wants to come up with. Why? Any attempt to confine marriage to any legally set parameters can be seen as discrimination based on hatred and bigotry.

    Matt Birk, thank you for your courage.

    • SM

      “There will be no basis to outlaw polygamy or any other form of marriage someone wants to come up with.”

      Or, as it’s known in the parts of the bible you guys don’t like to talk about, “traditional marriage”

      • ifollowHATE


    • Rich

      Francis – take a valium and a nap. You seem to be a bit grumpy and are swinging at monsters that don’t exist.
      You may not know this, but this website alleges to be about Catholic faith. You may want to check up on your catechism before you rant too far.
      One would referred to you as a Bigot because of your writing and the way that you seem to show no love LGBT people.
      In faith we have no time to waste on hating. If you want to follow Christ you have to give up your prejudices.

      • Francis Wippel

        Could you kindly point out to me where in the Catechism of the Catholic Church our faith supports the concept of redefining marriage to be something other than the union of a man and a woman? While you’re at it, could you also kindly point out to me where in my previous post I used hateful language?

        I have a basis for my belief which is in alignment with what my Catholic faith teaches about marriage. Unlike others who have posted here, I have labeled no one a bigot. I respect that fact that you and others don’t agree with me on this issue. What I have spoken out against here, in multiple posts, is in fact prejudice. In this case, that prejudice comes in the form of assumptions on your part that any opposition to gay marriage is based only on hatred of homosexuals. This is the easy way out of an argument, similar to those who claim that opposition to President Obama’s policies can only be because those who oppose him are racists.
        The Catholic Church has explained quite well its stance on marriage, and why it will only and always be between a man and a woman. The Church has explained this much better than I will be able to articulate. I humbly suggest that you spend some time reading the Church’s teachings on marriage.

  • AmericaPapist

    Thank you for proving how ugly bigotry really is. Not only do his comments make no sense, they are harmful to families.

    • abadilla

      So, as soon as one disagrees with gay marriage, one is a bigot, right? By this standard, so is the Pope and all the world’s bishops!

      • SM

        Um, yes. That pretty much nails it. The fact that it has been that way for thousands of years doesn’t make it any less bigoted.

        • Francis Wippel

          How tolerant of you. Intolerance is okay for you, but not for those who disagree with you. To assume that those on the other side of this argument have no basis for their stance on this issue is shallow. but an often used tactic of those who can’t win an argument on substance.

          • Rich

            Francis – you have no room to talk about tolerance. There is a whole forest in your eye that you need to deal with before you start trying to handle anyone else’s moral lacking.
            And you are correct that you are using the calling of people as intolerant because you have no substance to your argument.
            BTW – I am not prejudice to bigots. I think you are just as good as the cheats and liars that you endorse. : )

          • ifollowHATE

            You aren’t being tolerant at all either. You are using the laws of our nation to ban others from living their lives based on their faith. You can’t complain that others are being intolerant when that’s exactly what you are doing.

      • Rich

        No. You were a bigot before you chose to disagree with same gender marriage. You just used your bigotry to cover up for what you lacked in faith.

      • ifollowHATE

        No, as soon as you start using the laws of our nation to force your view of marriage on others, you become a bigot.

  • Chansen Stone

    Birk said marriage is in trouble for “many reasons that have little to do with same sex unions….The effects of no-fault divorce, adultery, and the nonchalant attitude toward marriage by some have done great harm to this sacred institution.” If this is true, then why are gays and lesbians the ones that are being penalized by being excluded from marriage rights? Gay couples must be condemned to suffer without legal rights because of the sins of straight married people that didn’t take their vows seriously?

    If you wonder why people think marriage supporters are intolerant and hateful, look no further than Birk, who appears to believe that gay people are to be punished because straight men like to cheat on their wives.

    • abadilla

      “Gay couples must be condemned to suffer without legal rights because of the sins of straight married people that didn’t take their vows seriously?” Stop the lies, the nonsense, and start using your brain. No one denies in this country any “rights” to gays. They can unite civilly if they wish and they can protect their rights, what they can’t do is to “demand” from the Catholic Church the sacrament of marriage, that simple. Stop pretending this is a civil rights issue and that somehow you are Martin Luther King Jr. It is repugnant to see how some Catholics are willing to twist the truth to distort Catholic teaching on this matter. Either abide by the Church’ moral teaching or get our of it and defend the indefensible. I am tired of your tirades at CV. If you don’t like this website, you don’t have to read it not write on it. Obviously the Minnesota Catholic Conference agrees with Matt Birk. Gee, I wonder why!

      • Rob

        At what point has anyone demanded Catholic marriage for gays? As many of us have said, why should non-Catholic gays be forced to live by Catholic laws anyways?



Receive our updates via email.