Who has defined "the traditional definition of marriage?"

In papers everywhere these days, in the discussion of same-sex marriage, we are confronted with the phrase "the traditional definition of marriage." Traditional according to whom, I've been wondering.

I googled the phrase "the traditional definition of marriage" (because a Google search, obviously, is the most thorough way to do research...) and came across, as you can imagine at this ridiculously politically charged juncture, more evangelical ravings "founded" in "fact" than any "traditional" or "historical" definitions.

This is what Terri Leo of Spring Texas, "a stay at home mom fed up with the influence of "liberal leaning groups"" did to change "language that tacitly endorsed same-sex "marriage" in secondary level health textbooks. I'm not an avid reader of the Baptist Press (?), but I'm sure glad that Terri's done her part to promote teen pregnancy and the oppression and hatred of homosexuals.

--"The former public school teacher, who was elected to the board in late 2002, cited every suspect reference that put the textbooks at odds with the state’s definition of marriage as the union between a man and a woman and a statute mandating an abstinence-based message in sex education.

With the addition of “a solid definition of marriage as a lifelong commitment
between a man and a woman” at the beginning of pertinent instruction in the Holt textbooks, Leo gladly dropped her concern that words like “partner” and “couple” could be misconstrued as references to same-sex couples. The Glencoe books traded “partners” for references to “husbands and wives” or “a man and a woman.” A passage that spoke of a person being “attracted to others” was changed to “attracted to the opposite sex.”

“We took an oath of office to uphold state law,” Leo said, “and state law defines marriage.”---


I love the smugness with which that last statement is rife. It's the tone I heard from Bush's supporters on election day- that "we always knew our guy would win because he's the chosen one" type of tone, that "Frankly, I just don't trust Kerry" tone. (What Bush has ever done to inspire the "trust" of anyone completely eludes me, but I won't rant on that at the moment...)

What can you expect from an evangelical "news" paper, I know, but these are the people who are calling the shots in America right now. How do you like them apples?