Monday, March 23, 2020

Frank Schubert is Still Around With the Same Old Bullshit

Frank Schubert
Frank Schubert in 2008 promoting California Prop 8
via National Organization for Marriage
Monday, Frank Schubert makes some sanctimonious noise about religion and the coronavirus. Schubert seems to be afflicted with a form of selective amnesia. At one of Brian S. Brown's outlets, Schubert has penned: Coronavirus Crisis Reminds Us of Eternal Truths of Marriage and Family.

Frank Schubert is, and has been, the political director for the National Organization for Marriage. He now plays a similar role at Howard Center For Family Religion and Society, an anti-LGBTQ hate group doing business as World Congress of Families and International Organization for the Family.

Schubert is most notable, perhaps, as a PR and political consultant to the Tobacco Institute. Schubert was subsequently the political director and chief strategist for Protect Marriage, the group responsible for California Proposition 8.

Schubert is a professional liar:
In today’s modern world, seemingly everything has been transformed into something political. Eternal truths and universal lived experiences are ignored, cast aside and ridiculed as outdated and even bigoted. Institutions like marriage and family are remade into political paradigms to serve emerging ideologies. Even science is scorned in order to advance gender ideology.
Schubert's problem is that progress increasingly contradicts the teachings of the Catholic Church. Those teachings define what Schubert refers to a “eternal truths.” Evidence becomes unnecessary and even contradictory. In the same sentence, Schubert refers to the best available science regarding the treatment of gender dysphoria as an “ideology” while, at the same time, claiming that science is being “scorned.”

And, yes, Mr. Schubert, claiming, for example, that gay people are “objectively disordered” is bigoted, regardless of the fact that the belief is in accordance with the teachings of the Catholic Church. If Mr. Schubert is wed to that belief — in direct contradication to a mountain of evidence — then he is a bigot by choice. Religion does not excuse bigotry.

Precisely who was responsible for turning marriage into a political contest? Schubert is seemingly claiming that Prop 8 was initiated by supporters of marriage equality:
But despite the constant attempts by groups, especially those on the left, to turn everything into a political matter, much of life has nothing to do with politics and ideology. Take marriage for example. There is nothing about the institution of marriage that is political despite the left’s ceaseless efforts to turn marriage into a political battle as they have sought to redefine it in the law in countless countries around the globe. Marriage is what it is – a universal, timeless relationship between men and women that brings the two halves of humanity together in order to form families to care for the children born of their union. This has been its purpose since the dawn of time.
That “timeless relationship between men and women” is part of a religious belief. “Two halves” is neither timeless nor universal. Four of Noah's wives were supposedly aboard the Ark. The early Christian writer St. Hippolytus knew the names of all the wives and children of Noah.

Schubert is fostering two (at least two falsehoods). The first is that marriage equality redefined marriage. The reality is that it broadened the eligible participants but remains the same thing. Simply stated the purpose for marriage has always been to create a marital estate.

Secondly, Schubert is claiming that advocates for marriage equality made marriage a political issue. That is not the case. Mr. Schubert and his friends made marriage equality a political issue.

Indeed, their plan was formed from the belief that marriage equality could never win at the polls. Schubert, Brian S. Brown and the rest of the misfits at National Organization for Marriage tried to make marriage equality a popularity contest. Yet, in 2012, they all got their asses kicked in November, losing four of four contests.

After pondering — over two paragraphs — that the coronavirus could result in both parents being home, it's back to marriage:
But beyond the economics are family dynamics. The essence of the marriage relationship is complementarity. Men and women are made for each other, body and soul, equal in every way. But equality does not equate to sameness. Men and women are not the same, they bring different strengths and approaches to everyday life, including to the care of children. This will be useful and beneficial for children, now during the crisis and later when it subsides. A child at home with both mom and dad is likely to experience first hand what research has clearly documented:
What Schubert then sets out to do is to present a picture of two different parents, separated by gender, that cannot represent same-sex parents. He does so through the use of stereotypes, claiming facts without evidence and by not citing specific research.

For example:
A mother’s inherent instinct is to protect her child, while a father will push his child to take risks.

The two will play differently with the child, the mother preferring orderly, rule-based games, the father preferring more physical activity, roughhousing and spontaneous activity with fewer rules.
Needless to say, Schubert is inventive. His aim is to support the catechism.

Schubert regurgitates mythology which was among the losing arguments in both United States v. Windsor and Obergefell v. Hodges:
The overwhelming body of evidence collected by social scientists demonstrates that children raised in a family with their married mother and father are much more likely to enjoy good and healthy relationships with their parents, and with others. They will enjoy better physical and mental health and experience less family instability. They achieve greater educational attainment, including getting better grades and have a lesser chance of being held back and ultimately dropping out of school. These children graduate from high school at a higher rate. They will be more likely to graduate from college and obtain jobs with higher occupational status and earnings, and will experience less unemployment and economic hardship. Boys raised in an intact home typically experience less juvenile delinquency and incarceration, while girls raised in an intact home have a lesser incidence of experiencing a teen pregnancy. Children raised by their married parents will have much less chance of experiencing poverty while growing up.
The above is true when married parents are compared to divorced and single parents. “The overwhelming body of evidence collected by social scientists,” as Schubert phrased things, demonstrates that children raised by gay couple are not disadvantaged. They fare at least as well as parents raised in traditional families and sometimes better.

Schubert insists on lying to support the teaches of the Catholic Church:
No other family structure comes close to delivering the enormous benefits to couples and children that [sic] does marriage between a man and a woman. Not single parents. Not same sex parents. Not parents who cohabitate.
Somehow Schubert's bigotry applies to solving the coronavirus problem:
In reality, we didn’t need social scientists to tell us all the benefits of marriage, not only for couples and children, but for entire societies. The benefits are obvious, observable and experienced by virtually every culture throughout history. Perhaps we might be well-advised during this crisis to resolve to stop treating natural marriage as a political matter and start promoting it as an essential institution integral to enhancing human flourishing.
“Natural marriage” is code for marriage discrimination. Schubert will never accept the fact that he lost and that marriage equality is the enduring law of the land. He will never accept the simple fact that marriage equality did not result in Western civilization coming to an end.

Schubert is desperate to believe that he made the better arguments. He needs to think that people are too stupid, too politically correct or too religiously agnostic to have accepted his arguments. We are seven years out from Windsor and the record demonstrates that Schubert was wrong. He is still wrong.

Related content:



No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.