Interesting logic from Kara Swisher here

Prop 8 passed on Election Day in November 2008, the same day that Barack Obama won the presidency. The historic Obama win was overshadowed by the poison of that ballot initiative, especially for my family.

We watched television that night in our house in the Castro neighborhood of San Francisco as election results came in. My then 6-year-old eldest son, upon hearing that Prop 8 had passed, was terrified and asked me whether our entire family — his other mom and I had married in the state years before — was now “illegal.” What a punch to the gut.

So Ms. Swisher was married years before 2008. As I recall her wife was/is a Google exec.

Marriage was not an option for people like me until the Supreme Court affirmed, in a 2015 civil rights case, Obergefell v. Hodges, that same-sex couples have a fundamental constitutional right to marry.

Ms. Swisher was not able to marry another woman until 2015.

Strangely, I’ve rarely rated Ms. Swisher’s journalism.

25 thoughts on “Interesting logic from Kara Swisher here”

  1. Bloke in North Dorset

    My then 6-year-old eldest son, upon hearing that Prop 8 had passed, was terrified and asked me whether our entire family — his other mom and I had married in the state years before — was now “illegal.” What a punch to the gut.

    Its amazing how many journalists have precocious children that have a far deeper and wider understanding of policy debates, human rights, gay rights etc than the average adult, let alone their peers.

    Or should we just read that far and think, “didn’t happen, yet more bollocks” and walk away.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    Lesbian abuses a boy by denying him the benefits of a normal childhood and then blames everyone else for not going along with her delusions?

    Ooookay.

    Some of us might think the solution is to, you know, marry. Which by necessity involves a man.

  3. My then 6-year-old eldest son, upon hearing that Prop 8 had passed, was terrified and asked me whether our entire family — his other mom and I had married in the state years before — was now “illegal.” What a punch to the gut

    That’s nothing. After the Brexit referendum results, my woke 12 year old said “Dad, this is clearly a regressive campaign by shadowy disaster capitalists, nebulous Russian secret agents, and fascist Facebook marketing companies and we must resist!”

    “Lol, go to bed, Owen”, I told him.

  4. Over the last couple of generations heterosexuals have made such a dog’s breakfast of marriage that I find it hard to get worked up about the antics of homosexuals of the marrying kind.

  5. Gay marriage was legal when she got married. Prop 8 rendered it illegal, so people like her weren’t able to get married. Then after Obergefell, it was legal again. How is that a failure of logic?

  6. “Does this mean I’m illegal mummy?”

    “No darling, it means you’re a little bastard. Now shut up and eat your greens.”

  7. Harry Haddock's Ghost

    If a 6 year old thought that this proposition threatened his family, he did so because his guardians had left him to believe so.

    That’s borderline abuse; a failure of basic parenting at the very least, and has nothing to do with gay marriage (which I fully support – who can marry who being no business of the state whatsoever).

  8. Above posts are correct – this is child abuse. A 6 year old should not be terrorized by an election. The parents are terrorizing him.

    “who can marry who (sic) being no business of the state whatsoever”

    Disagree. E.g., a man shouldn’t be able to marry a 10 year old girl. Even with parental permission. A man shouldn’t be able to marry his Collie so he can get medical insurance for it.

    As far as same sex adults, I’m fine with it, as long as it is not called marriage. Gay marriage is fine. Many private benefits are set up for married people. The provider of said benefits should not be forced to provide said benefits for gay marrieds. They may choose to, but it shouldn’t be forced on them. They were thinking traditional marriage when they set them up.

    Gay married != married

  9. The problem isn’t the gays, the problem is the institution of marriage is pretty much dead. It’s still shuffling around as a zombified husk of its former self (like a lot of our institutions), but it doesn’t really mean anything anymore.

    The purpose of marriage is to provide for wives and children. If people can’t be arsed procreating, and the state has taken over the role of provider, what you’re left with is expensive parties.

  10. Almost everything you automatically contract to by getting married can be contracted to as individual items.
    Make a will.
    Specify the beneficary in your pension and life insurance.
    Put both your names on your tenancy.
    Borrow your mortgage in both your names.
    Specify next of kin and visiting rights in medical records.
    Adopt your partner’s children.

    All that getting married does is passport all those things over in one go.

  11. Bloke in North Dorset

    As far as same sex adults, I’m fine with it, as long as it is not called marriage. Gay marriage is fine. Many private benefits are set up for married people. The provider of said benefits should not be forced to provide said benefits for gay marrieds. They may choose to, but it shouldn’t be forced on them. They were thinking traditional marriage when they set them up.

    Agree with that, with the exception that the main reason gays should be allowed to marry is so that they can access any benefits that the State confers on married people (mostly around things like inheritance and tax), and take up any responsibilities. The State should not be discriminating.

    That’s why my position is that as the established church, the CofE, should be obliged to offer marriage ceremonies for gays but the other religions shouldn’t. CofE can disestablish if it doesn’t like it.

  12. @ BiND
    CofE would like to disestablish itself but cannot – that is for Parliament. I have no objection to Civil Union but it is not marriage and it is not a sacrament.
    The CofE does not practice exemption for clergy from civil courts and try them only in ecclesiastical courts as pre-reformation RCs did for centuries – why are you asking for the reverse?

  13. Harry Haddock's Ghost

    Disagree. E.g., a man shouldn’t be able to marry a 10 year old girl. Even with parental permission. A man shouldn’t be able to marry his Collie so he can get medical insurance for it.

    Ok, let me clarify. As with any contract, people would have to be of majority age before they would be valid. But the rest is none of the states business. If a private insurance company wants to recognise the union of man and beast for the purpose of health insurance, that’s their funeral.

    There are two basic components of a marriage. One is mostly contractual (sharing of assets and whatnot) which should apply to any two consenting adults who voluntarily enter into one. The other component is all about culture, religion and rumpy pumpy. I don’t see how the state should interfere in either. Perhaps a dispute resolution role, as per any other contract, but that’s it.

    For instance – why should two lesbians who marry get tax, etc, benefits from the state that two spinster sisters who set up home together don’t not get just because they aren’t tipping the velvet?

  14. Bloke in North Dorset

    John,

    The Lords Spiritual are part of the law making process and should not have the right to reject anyone who wants association. The other religions are just private clubs as far as I’m concerned, who they let in is up to them.

  15. So Much For Subtlety

    The benefit of marriage that people are not mentioning is that the institution, or what is left of it, has the state behind it to force other people to recognise it. That is the point.

    Gays are not interested in marriage. They are interested in forcing Catholic priests to give them absolution. They want Gay marriage as a way of forcing people to treat Gay sex as the same as real sex.

    I have a solution. I used to believe that we could all tolerate each other and go our own ways. But that option seems closed off. If so, I suggest we simply revert to the traditional solution and put Gay people into prison. In the end, it will be us or them.

  16. Prison is excessive. Island conclaves could work. Isolated from society without the walls.

    Something in the Outer Hebrides could work.

  17. Society used to believe in the future, in passing down an inheritance to future generations. Sexual behaviour was kept out of the public space, partly because of “the children “. What has happened over the past three decades has been a demolition job. Pride marches in bondage gear led by prepubescent drag queens, the silencing of anyone who argues that dead white males contributed something worthwhile or that logically you cannot be born in the wrong body. I have had some great gay friends but now that I am entering the grandma zone, Inrealise that for them, their investment in the future ends at death, this is a kind of nihilism that has infected the culture.

  18. The CofE still has it’s (M&S) knickers in a twist over female clergy.

    How on earth it is going to manage something as divisive as equal marriage, I have no idea. The Scottish Episcopal Church took over 4 years, had a Bishop retire early, lost a few older clergy and one church, before it managed to get the canon changed.

  19. Something in the Outer Hebrides could work.

    St Kilda would volunteer but I think that has already been earmarked for the Extinction Rebellion lot.

  20. Her reaction reminds me of one of the arseholes who sued a baker who wouldn’t provide a cake for a gay wedding. Mind you, he served gays, had done so for this same couple, but didn’t want to participate in a gay wedding. One of the poofs whined something like “I felt like a second-class citizen, like there were people in my own country who didn’t like me”. Bingo! Grow up sweetheart, there are a lot of people who don’t like you (millions of them since the lawsuit BS), but, hey, that’s true of everybody.

    You don’t have the right to make everybody else like you or approve of your lifestyle, and if you can’t be happy without them pretending to, you need therapy.

  21. ‘The historic Obama win’

    FFS.

    ‘overshadowed by the poison of that ballot initiative’

    Excuse my schadenfreude giggle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *