Anne Marie Schubert has got herself one uphill battle here in Sacramento. She is running to become a Superior Court judge, but she carries with her a burden that is unspeakably unfair. She is Frank Schubert's sister.
Her brother has become something of a brand-name among the anti-gay marriage crowd, not just in California but across the entire nation; he is the gold standard by which all future anti-gay campaigns will be judged, unbelievably successful in convincing voters that same-sex couples are intent on destroying marriage (by wanting to get married) and undermining religion, education, civil society and possibly the global financial superstructure.
Ms. Schubert seems like a fairly decent, run-of-the-mill judicial candidate with an adequate resume and what appears to be solid experience. It will be a shame if people cast their vote for or against her because of what her brother has done. She shouldn't be held responsible for the actions of other people - her brother or anyone else.
But she is a lesbian, and that's what happens to us all too frequently. People get agitated by the actions of one or two gay people somewhere or other, and then point to us as a group, claiming that we all are to blame for what those very few, very unique people have done, rather than judging us on what we, ourselves might do or be. We are tarred by associations we didn't even know we had.
That, of course, is what her brother is now making a career out of doing. The irony will be deep enough to swim in if Sacramento's mostly Democratic voters reject Ms. Schubert because of her brother's jihad. It's profoundly unfair to mischaracterize and maltreat her for her brother's actions in mischaracterizing and maltreating gay people across the country. But his actions do have consequences and spillover effects, not only for those gay people he doesn't know, but very possibly for one he actually does.
And so far I'm only talking about the damage he's done to his sister among those on the left. That's a drop in the bucket compared to what he's done in stirring up anti-gay passions (and they are passions) among the right, and particularly among religious believers who, due in large part to his efforts, are now deeply moved to vote because of concerns about homosexuality.
Of course, it's also entirely possible that Anne Marie's lesbianism and domestic partnership will be a non-issue among those voters, or that in the low profile local judicial race, her sexual orientation and marital (kind of) status will go unnoticed. That is now the best she can hope for.
Frank, too. He is trying hard to distance himself from his own venom and the natural consequences of his handiwork. "My activities in politics are mine alone - she doesn't have anything to do with them," he says.
Hey! He may have something there. My activities in politics, too, are mine alone, and I'm not responsible for the actions or beliefs of others, whether it's one employee at El Coyote Restaurant or some school in Massachusetts, or anyone who signed the absurd and irrelevant Beyond Same-Sex Marriage manifesto, or declaration, or whatever the hell it is. Or NAMBLA.
I suspect Ms. Schubert and I, and a whole lot of other lesbians and gay men, would be on exactly the same page about finding it wearying, and actually harmful to be constantly held responsible for burdens not of our own making. Perhaps she could talk to her brother about that.
4 Comments for “Schubert v. Schubert”
posted by BobN on
“My activities in politics are mine alone â she doesn’t have anything to do with them,” he says.
Is he just another craven political animal in an age in which ethics takes a back seat to winning or is he a sociopath? Of course his activities have something to do with her. They HARM her.
posted by Lib-bear-ian on
One day, some graduate student will publish a dissertation on an anti-gay activists and their gay family members (Phyllis and John Schafly, Newt and Candace Gingrich, Peter Knight, etc.) I think that will make for interesting reading
posted by DD on
The logic of Schubert’s campaigns has been: if X is legal, then X will be taught to and promoted among schoolchildren. Therefore, we can only conclude that if his sister wins, CA will have to teach vulnerable innocent elementary students about lesbian judges and their domestic partners.
posted by Jorge on
Who’s holding anyone responsible for anything? All this is just free publicity for a candidate in an otherwise party-line election. A candidate who probably has the wrong letter after her name. Interesting footnote that there’s almost a political dynasty, but whatever.
Personally I’d probably vote for her on the basis of party affiliation alone, but it’s not my call. I can’t imagine a pro-gay marriage or Democratic electorate thinking it’s a good idea to vote Republicans for judgeships, and without knowing California law I doubt they’d be voting in the primaries.
As I recall, the Chief Justice in the Massachussets Supreme Court–a no vote on you know what–was a lesbian.