Google: vote no on Prop. 8
By Wally N. EdgeGoogle took the uncharacteristic step of chiming in on a social issue when they announced on their blog that they are against Proposition 8, which would eliminate the right of gay couples to marry:
As an Internet company, Google is an active participant in policy debates surrounding information access, technology and energy. Because our company has a great diversity of people and opinions -- Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals, all religions and no religion, straight and gay -- we do not generally take a position on issues outside of our field, especially not social issues. So when Proposition 8 appeared on the California ballot, it was an unlikely question for Google to take an official company position on.
However, while there are many objections to this proposition -- further government encroachment on personal lives, ambiguously written text -- it is the chilling and discriminatory effect of the proposition on many of our employees that brings Google to publicly oppose Proposition 8. While we respect the strongly-held beliefs that people have on both sides of this argument, we see this fundamentally as an issue of equality. We hope that California voters will vote no on Proposition 8 -- we should not eliminate anyone's fundamental rights, whatever their sexuality, to marry the person they love.
Contributors
Wally S. Edge
This week's Winners & Losers. | CLICK HERE >
Wally N. Edge
And now for something completely different:
Acting on behalf of the Almighty Eternal Creator, who is holding sole ownership to His ... >
Alex Benes
Can’t run again? Fire away!
On the cusp of an emergency session of the legislature, termed-out Assemblyman John Laird (D-Santa Cruz) took the ... >
Rob Tornoe
To view a larger version of this cartoon, click here. >
| Politicker INTERACTIVE | |
 |
Lawmaker Profile Follow the funding of your representatives |
 |
270 to Win See how Obama got to the magic number |
Top Tags
Most Active Stories
- In CA-04, McClintock lead now at 592 votes over Brown
- Lawmakers push Thompson for Interior Department head
- Prop. 8 lawyer: ‘No one would be able to stop' recall attempt of justices should high court invalidate ballot measure
- Harman, Reicher candidates for Obama administration posts
- Huber trails by 1,000 in AD-10, no change in CA-04 vote totals
- Police question O.C. GOP executive director based on false lead
- Brown closes to less than 400 votes of McClintock's lead
- McClintock campaign claims victory in CA-04
- Brown camp says McClintock victory not assured
- Silicon Valley CEO steps down, fueling rumors of Obama administration appointment
- Alan Keyes files suit over Obama citizenship question
- Sheehan claims her campaign against Pelosi is being sabotaged
- Former L.A. Mayor crosses party lines, endorses Obama
- Key Californians in line for presidential appointments
- CA Nurses Association airs McCain/Palin ad in battleground states
- Miller says government must next turn its attention to propping up sagging 401K and pension plans
- Bay Area transportation chief under consideration for Obama Administration post
- Wolk launches TV ad over Aghazarian per diem collections
- Newsom acknowledges 'failures' of San Francisco's 'sanctuary city' policies
- Huffman named co-chair of high-profile Assembly Environmental Caucus
Quote of the Day
"I am honored by the vote of the Democratic Caucus. We are at a unique moment and have an opportunity that comes only once in a generation. I will work with all parts of our Caucus and across the aisle to deliver the change that the American public expects us to deliver."
-- U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman on his selection as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee
Recent Press Releases
- November 5, 2008
- October 29, 2008
Syndicate
Tired of Homos riding your butt on the Freeway?
Vote Yes on 8.
Re: GAY MAN VOTES YES ON 8
John in Los Angeles wrote:
[Quite a lengthy rant that can be read below.]
Hey, stop and take a breath... I can imagine how the current financial disaster in the US can cause you to question the motives of all manner of political discussions.
But please take a minute to contemplate what you're promoting in your rant. You want to condemn a significant portion of the population (including yourself?) to a perpetual second-class citizenship. You are endorsing a 'separate but equal' view of the LGBT population - a view that ostensibly was banned by law, in terms of race, some 40 years ago (whether the law has really done any good might be another story).
Please take the larger view, and have a care as to your future and the future of LGBT in society at large, before you fly off the handle and do something that, in the long haul, you may come to regret.
Re: Societal Ideals
beetlebabee wrote:
"Proposition 8 restores and protects marriage as the ideal environment for raising our children."
It's not that easy to see how it is 'ideal'. Why not look at a couple of *concrete* examples?
A hetero couple gets married, following what they've been taught are societal 'norms'. Children follow (or occasionally precede). On the one hand, there's a wagerable likelihood that the pressures of modern life, and the expectations of the 'traditional' marriage, will cause the marriage to fail. Everyone loses.
On the other hand, these pressures may cause the marriage to devolve into a loveless, abusive relationship that does *not* result in divorce... and the children are witness to this toxic relationship in all its gory details. Everyone loses.
There's sufficient evidence to make a case that hetero marriage is a *problem* of modern Western culture. Not necessarily much 'ideal' about it.
(Full disclosure: my wife and I are happily married 8 years. No kids yet.)
GAY MAN VOTES YES ON 8
Ok-Ok, enough is enough! Don’t we have anything else better to do come Election Day! As an openly gay male, who did 23 years of services as an “openly gay police officer” with the LAPD, I think it is time for someone to say to the GLBT Community, “STOP egging on religious right radical heterosexuals!” We have better things to worry about than what someone else “labels” my (our) relationship (s).
Come November 5th, I do not expect my life with my domestic partner to change one bit-NO MATTER HOW PROP 8 TURNS OUT! After reading my California Election guide sent by the state in the US mail; I find this whole matter to be petty nonsense. Give what has been happening to our nation, this matter is a much to-do about nothing and is a kin to spitting into the wind people. To the trendy/ politically correct “West Hollywood and San Francisco drama queens (the people with NO life) pushing this whole proposition (on BOTH SIDES) I say, GROW UP PEOPLE-WHO CARES!” In nut shell this is all about “nomenclature”, “vernacular” and “political correctness”-NOT ABOUT “RIGHTS” OR WHAT WILL (WILLNOT) BE TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS. So, to this end, I will probably Vote “yes” just because hopefully, the activist in the gay community will give up and leave the heterosexual people alone-they have enough to worry about these days.
If anyone will lose in this deal; it will be the State of California and the loss of “sales tax revenues” from all the trendy drama queens rushing to the alter to get hitched. The state won’t be making about 200.00 per marriage license, or all the other “state fees”. My domestic partnership papers with the City of LA cost me nothing at all-they were free and legally binding. The State on the other hand wants 55.00 to file a domestic partnership paper-guess which one I opted for! Why (in these hard times) would I ever want to pay for something when I already get it f “free!” Whatever you call it is mildly interesting to me.
If these crazy heterosexual people want to throw their money down the drain and give it to The State of California-SO BE IT! WHO CARES-I SURE DON'T! I ALREADY PAY ENOUGH TAXES AND STATE FEES! I NEED A BREAK! I am really leaning towards voting yes on this because I dislike the trendy-petty drama queens and overly forceful lesbians always telling me how I should think and how I should vote. At least the religious right has grounded their arguments in “tradition” and I have to admit there is something to be said for this type of belief system.
Societal Ideals
I think people make a mistake when they talk about ideals in terms of their own experiences. None of us lives the ideal. The ideal is what we hold up, even if not all of us follow it whether by choice or circumstance. The argument here is that marriage between a man and a woman ought to remain the ideal because both genders contribute uniquely to a child's development. Gay marriage by definition prevents a child from the benefit of two genders in their parental influence. Though I support gays right to choose their own lifestyle, it is a flawed ideal.
Divorce is a tragedy. Death of a parent is a tragedy. Those things happen, we make due...but it's not the ideal. No other societal arrangement can fully compensate for the loss of a mom or dad in a kids' life. Let's not embrace lesser family arrangements as our ideals.
Proposition 8 restores and protects marriage as the ideal environment for raising our children.
Think About the Children
The circumstances of divorce you portray are no different then any straight couple divorce.
The children get hurt. We are two moms with two children that we have raised. They are now grown productive members of society. We are blessed in our relationship. As a couple and family we all continue to flourish despite the portion of society that discriminate against us, all of us. We are a cohesive family we deserve the same laws protecting us as all other kinds of families. You don't use the State or U.S. Constitution to remove rights to discriminate against others.
What are you talking about?
You act as if straight couples never get divorced! If you stay married for more than one year it is considered a success. If it's any people that ruin the idea of marriage it's us straight people. Assuming you are straight because most people who are anti-gay tend to be in the closet themselves. The divorce rate makes marriage look like a joke in its current form. And wow @ you putting quotes around mom's and divorce!
Before you use the "activist judges don't have the right to take away what 61% of Californians voted for in 2000" argument here is something to nibble on. If it weren't for these judges interracial couples would still not have the right to marry each other. I don't know if this will have any effect on you, in case you are racist too.
My uncle and his HUSBAND (now) raised my aunt's son after she deserted him in 1990 as an infant. He has turned out fine. He has just started college @ UC Berkeley this fall. I, as well as my two older brothers, was raised with a wonderful mother and father. One of my brother's is a drug addict who has been to rehab 3 times. There are good and bad to any child that a parent must deal with. Having two mom's or two dad's or a mother and a father has no bearing on whether or not the child turns out okay.
People like you make me sick.
Please vote Yes on 8
Men and women are different.That diversity is important. Each brings unique approach to raising kids and future generations. Removing gender will change the focus of marriage and why we promote it. This isn't about 2 people in love, nor about "benefits"; that's Domestic Partnerships. No need to destroy the purpose of marriage for a stamp of approval for personal choices of a few. Prop 8 isn't about "rights". Everyone is man or woman. All have right of marriage of man/woman. Some have no interest in that, their choice. But it is intolerant for them to demand redefinition for the rest. Changing it to include any combo of genders weakens marriage. Gays can live as they want. But society needs to promote marriage of man/woman, because it is critical for the future survival of society, enough that 4 judges ruling by fiat must not be allowed to override the will of the people on defining this most vital foundational institution of society. Friends, please, Yes on 8.
Think about the Children
Children deserve a mother and a father. Each provides unique attributes. There is nothing so beautiful as seeing a young couple pushing a stroller with a young child and seeing the love radiating from their eyes.
Contrast this to a young man I know who had two "moms" and now they are "divorced". Who has custody. 61 percent of Californians voted in 2000 to keep traditional marriage. 4 out of 3 judges overturned it.
Prop 8 is about keeping judges from overturning the will of the people. Cohesive families extend to cohesive societies. Please vote YES on Prop 8.
Post new comment