Google Opposes Anti-Gay Marriage Ban

In An Unusual Move For Tech Firm, Founder Says " Discriminatory Effect" On Employees Led To Statement

(CNET)  Google has taken a public stand against Proposition 8, an anti-gay marriage measure on the November ballot in California.

Co-founder Sergey Brin, who made the announcement in a blog Friday afternoon, acknowledged that it is unusual for his company to take stands on issues outside the tech realm. The company "especially" avoids taking stands on social issues, he said, because of the diversity of its workforce.

However, Brin said, "it is the chilling and discriminatory effect of the proposition on many of our employees that brings Google to publicly oppose Proposition 8."

"We should not eliminate anyone's fundamental rights, whatever their sexuality, to marry the person they love," he said.

Brin did not mention whether Google will do anything else to oppose the measure, other than taking a stand.

The official site opposing the proposition includes a long list of backers. No companies are listed there. However, on Thursday, Levi Strauss & Co. and PG&E became co-chairs of the No On Prop 8 Equality Business Council. And in July, PG&E donated $250,000 to the campaign.

[elkc]

Too bad someone isn''t listening in Arizona. After voters rejected an attempt to redefine marrage four years ago, 49 law makers pushed for the same question to appear on the ballot again. Hopefully someone in Arizona will have guts enough to stand up and vote as many of the 49 out of office as possible.

[sierrahiker-2009]

Where do these "rights" come from anyway? Do you get a package of them when you''re born? I don''t remember getting any rights beyond what''s outlined in the constitution. Since the government defines what "rights" we have and also the rules for marriage, where did we get these rights beyond what the law defines as marriage, that people seem to insist we have? If gov''t defined it as between a male and female human, then that''s what it is. Don''t buy that? Then ignore it. Why do you need the government''s blessing to do what you think is right? Conversely, quit trying to tell others that they have to accept your version of what is "right". Marry whom you choose, and if the gov''t won''t do it, have a friend do it...it''s only a piece of paper that apparently means less and less as time goes on. Why do you insist that I have to agree with you? If someone wants to marry his/her boyfriend, girlfriend, or cow, I don''t care, but I reserve the right to think of them what I think of them. Quit inventing rights that don''t exist.

[trumpetstuff]

Marriage is not a "Right", it`s a privilege, given by God almighty, between man and woman.

God created Adam and Eve for each other, not Adam and Steve

Posted by StopSocialis at 11:39 AM : Sep 29, 2008

-----------------------
-----------------------

You have every right to your religious beliefs. And you don''t have to like same-$ex marriage. If you don`t believe in it, then don`t marry someone of your gender. You also have the right to express your opinion and religious beliefs as you have done here.

However - our beloved country is not a theocracy. You do not have the right to impose your religious beliefs on others via legislation. At least not in the America I remember.

[charlieot]

Gee if google doesn''''t like it I guess I don''''t either. How stupid, who cares what google thinks, and also what any actor/actress thinks (most of them have almost passed high school and therefore MUST be taken seriously).

What this will come down to is what CALIFORNIANS want. If most of them vote for it it is law, if not it isn''''t.

What is most funny about all of this, is that if it is voted in then it is unamerican/yada yada yada. But if it does not pass then it is all OK. The athiest left needs to get a life and stop shoving their agenda down our throats (tehe).

Posted by msgtsteve at 12:46 PM : Sep 29, 2008

Where oh where to begin...
Actors and actresses...I guess you didn''t care what Ronald Reagan had to say...he was after all just an actor...
Ben Stein...another actor...
Fred Thompson...actor...
Entertainers in general..
Mick Jagger...Masters of Economics, College of London
Tommy Lee Jones...Harvard Graduate
Kris Kristofferson...Rhodes Scholar, Oxford University

There are plenty of knowledgeable people in that industry on *both* sides of the fence.

As a corporate citizen, Google''s viewpoints are no less important (or more) than any other citizen. However, should Google (and possibly others) decide Ca. is not hospitable and moves out of state, there could be significant economic impact.

I''ll leave the unamerican vs ok remark for now....

[oldsoftee]

StopSocialis - If God is perfect, explain why He didn''t create Adam and Eve at exactly the same time. Why did it take a lonely (and probably randy) Adam to prompt God to remedy this original oversight?

[alanantonio]

What a brave stand! In a world that''s full of pain, why would it be wrong to marry the person you love?

[renojmc]

Shame on Google. God''s word clearly tells us that homosexuality is wrong. Deny it at your own risk!

[sierrahiker-2009]

"We should not eliminate anyone''s fundamental rights, whatever their sexuality, to marry the person they love," he said.

When did marriage become a fundamental right, or be "expanded" to include same-*** couples? Just recently, as far as I can tell, and only because somehow the activists are insisting it''s a fundamental right.

But I think his use of the word "person" is discriminatory. Why should it have to be a person? Isn''t that just a moral judgment? Probably religiously inspired. People should be able to marry whoever or whatever they want, even perhaps themselves, and have full rights so that no one can even cast them a sidewise glance when they, say, are getting intimate with their chicken in a public park.

And why can''t we run around the streets without clothes, isn''t that a religious law? Or relieve ourselves in the middle of a crowd, yet another infringement of religion on our fundamental rights. Hey, let''s just turn the whole country into Burning Man, with all those cool people, like the old potbellies with the shirts and no pants, wouldn''t that be nice? They probably work at Google anyway.

[matter77]

Google Opposes Anti-Gay Marriage Ban, so...Google is opposed to Gay-Marriage? They''re against a double-negative - Google is opposed to the ban, so they must be Anti-Gay. That''s what this says.

[sylvenger]

Thank you Sergey Brin and Google for being the voice of reason in a world of religious intolerance. It''s encouraging to see support like this from such a well known company.

[dan400man]

sierrahiker, not only that, but why am I limited to a 2-entity marriage? Shouldn''t my wife and I be allowed to marry another couple, in addition to our dog? After all, it is my fundamental right to do so. My adult daughter wants to join our marriage, too. I dunno, incest is illegal... WAIT! As consenting adults, my daughter and I should be able to procreate if we want! That''s our fundamental right!

And on, and on, and on...

[mensarino]

matter77-----You simply must enroll in a logic class----now!

[germanmom]

matter77: I totally missed that. How funny!

mensarino: You and I are both in error; private conversations are not allowed on this board.

[swingset4u]

Shame on Google. God''''s word clearly tells us that homosexuality is wrong. Deny it at your own risk!


Posted by renojmc

Yeah and the TEN Commandmants are NOT multiple choice. You must lead a perfect life...

[dylan214u]

As this country turns a way from God it continues its spiral down the tubes or has anyone noticed. We want to ban the cropping of dog''s ears yet women are falling all over themselves getting implants. People are being ridiculed for the obvious. Are we the new Romans?

[dan9111]

No, matter77 has it right! An "anti-gay marriage ban" is a ban against marriage between two people who are "anti-gay". In other words, homophobes would be prohibited from marriage. The fact that Google opposes such a ban means they are defending homophobes.

That is literally what the article title means!

[caeric]

I really hesitate to enter this discussion, because religious fundamentalists can seldom understand rational thought, but there is one thing I need to point out:

The United States was NOT founded on Christianity. The Founding Fathers were Deists, not Christians. In fact, George Washington and John Adams, in a diplomatic message to Malta stated "The United States is in no way founded upon the Christian doctrine."

There is a reason for separation of church and state.

There is a difference in passing a law to affirm rights, and in passing a law to prevent fair treatment, especially a law based on a religious doctrine held by only a percentage of the population in a nation that supposedly has separation of church and state.

Not all Americans are Christian. Not all Christians are fundamentalists.

There should be no law based solely on religious belief, especially in a nation as diverse as the US.

Religous fundamentalism, to the exclusion of rational thought and simple decent humanity is BAD.

[upto1947]

I just took Google off my PC. He is wrong and I hope he goes broke.

[upto1947]

perfect life. no. the only man to do that was killed. You shouild read, and not talk so much.

[rwrich56]

Who ever
You call yourself a Christian but don''t follow the complete teachings Christ. I don''t believe we should have to give up our legal right that we voted for in this country and was founded by people wanting to practice Christianity .To hide perversion by saying it%u2019s a God given right to equality is wrong , it has nothing to do about race or color, You do have the God given right to have agency to chose right from wrong, but not the right to force anyone else to give up their%u2019s to have their children learn and accept homosexuality as every one is trying to do . I am sorry your eyes being hidden from real truth and hope you will see the true light of Christ in its totality, not just some pieces of scripture mixed with the philosophies of man.
As for me and my house I will follow the lord and I would be using google anymore

[revneil]

As a person of faith I believe that I am called to follow Christ in my personal life. As a person with social conscience, as Jesus was, we note that he was always on the side of the oppressed and marginalized.

In a country where we honor separation of church and state, I believe that marriage equality is a civil rights issue and should continue to be legal in California, and throughout the country.

As someone who believes Jesus who said, "whatever you have done to the least of these, you have done unto me", I believe that that he would have voted against Proposition 8.

Christians who actually follow Jesus (rather than Paul) would be wise to follow Jesus'' example.

VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 8

[gloriamundi]

I want to tell you all the story of an older friend who, as researchers estimate at least ten percent of people are, was born with the inclination to be gay. When she was 14 her father who was a preacher had her committed to an asylum to correct her inclination. After weeks of electro-shock-therapy she somehow escaped and somehow made her way in the world on her own. She retained her gay identity, but was plagued by a lifetime of anxiety, and while she was willing to forgive her parents and attempted to rekindle the relationship, the were not willing to forgive her, and they disowned her. I know another person with a similar story,but hers included sexual abuse by a male Christian relative, and she could never live anywhere for very long because her PTSD made it impossible to endure the persecution she found everywhere. I know yet another similar person for whom the intervention of his parents and psychiatrists was ostensibly a success, and he is now a heavily medicated shell of the fun, creative person he used to be. But, hey, at least he''s not living an actively gay life, right.

I still don''t understand the anti-gay marriage position. I would like to say to those people: Even though you don''t socialize your kids to be gay, a certain percentage will be born with the inclination anyway. Does your version of god really give you the right to persecute them and ruin their lives?

[gloriamundi]

I want to tell you all the story of an older friend who, as researchers estimate at least ten percent of people are, was born with the inclination to be gay. When she was 14 her father who was a preacher had her committed to an asylum to correct her inclination. After weeks of electro-shock-therapy she somehow escaped and somehow made her way in the world on her own. She retained her gay identity, but was plagued by a lifetime of anxiety, and while she was willing to forgive her parents and attempted to rekindle the relationship, the were not willing to forgive her, and they disowned her. I know another person with a similar story,but hers included sexual abuse by a male Christian relative, and she could never live anywhere for very long because her PTSD made it impossible to endure the persecution she found everywhere. I know yet another similar person for whom the intervention of his parents and psychiatrists was ostensibly a success, and he is now a heavily medicated shell of the fun, creative person he used to be. But, hey, at least he''s not living an actively gay life, right.

I still don''t understand the anti-gay marriage position. I would like to say to those people: Even though you don''t socialize your kids to be gay, a certain percentage will be born with the inclination anyway. Does your version of god really give you the right to persecute them and ruin their lives?

[gloriamundi]

I want to tell you all the story of an older friend who, as researchers estimate at least ten percent of people are, was born with the inclination to be gay. When she was 14 her father who was a preacher had her committed to an asylum to correct her inclination. After weeks of electro-shock-therapy she somehow escaped and somehow made her way in the world on her own. She retained her gay identity, but was plagued by a lifetime of anxiety, and while she was willing to forgive her parents and attempted to rekindle the relationship, the were not willing to forgive her, and they disowned her. I know another person with a similar story,but hers included sexual abuse by a male Christian relative, and she could never live anywhere for very long because her PTSD made it impossible to endure the persecution she found everywhere. I know yet another similar person for whom the intervention of his parents and psychiatrists was ostensibly a success, and he is now a heavily medicated shell of the fun, creative person he used to be. But, hey, at least he''s not living an actively gay life, right.

I still don''t understand the anti-gay marriage position. I would like to say to those people: Even though you don''t socialize your kids to be gay, a certain percentage will be born with the inclination anyway. Does your version of god really give you the right to persecute them and ruin their lives?

[gloriamundi]

I want to tell you all the story of an older friend who, as researchers estimate at least ten percent of people are, was born with the inclination to be gay. When she was 14 her father who was a preacher had her committed to an asylum to correct her inclination. After weeks of electro-shock-therapy she somehow escaped and somehow made her way in the world on her own. She retained her gay identity, but was plagued by a lifetime of depression and anxiety, and while she was willing to forgive her parents and attempted to rekindle the relationship, the were not willing to forgive her, and they disowned her. I know another person with a similar story,but hers included sexual abuse by a male Christian relative, and she could never live anywhere for very long because her PTSD made it impossible to endure the persecution she found everywhere. I know yet another similar person for whom the intervention of his parents and psychiatrists was ostensibly a success, and he is now a heavily medicated shell of the fun, creative person he used to be. But, hey, at least he''s not living an actively gay life, right.

I still don''t understand the anti-gay marriage position. I would like to say to those people: Even though you don''t socialize your kids to be gay, a certain percentage will be born with the inclination anyway. Does your version of god really give you the right to persecute them and ruin their lives?

[gloriamundi]

I want to tell you all the story of an older friend who, as researchers estimate at least ten percent of people are, was born with the inclination to be gay. When she was 14 her father who was a preacher had her committed to an asylum to correct her inclination. After weeks of electro-shock-therapy she somehow escaped and somehow made her way in the world on her own. She retained her gay identity, but was plagued by a lifetime of depression and anxiety, and while she was willing to forgive her parents and attempted to rekindle the relationship, the were not willing to forgive her, and they disowned her. I know another person with a similar story,but hers included sexual abuse by a male Christian relative, and she could never live anywhere for very long because her PTSD made it impossible to endure the persecution she found everywhere. I know yet another similar person for whom the intervention of his parents and psychiatrists was ostensibly a success, and he is now a heavily medicated shell of the fun, creative person he used to be. But, hey, at least he''s not living an actively gay life, right.

I still don''t understand the anti-gay marriage position. I would like to say to those people: Even though you don''t socialize your kids to be gay, a certain percentage will be born with the inclination anyway. Does your version of god really give you the right to persecute them and ruin their lives?

[nomoregoog]

STOP USING GOOGLE. GOOGLE IS DANGEROUS FOR KIDS

ROME WAS NOT DESTROYED BY OUTSIDERS, BUT BY INSIDERS WHO LOST MORAL VALUES.

GOOGLE IS TRYING TO DESTROY THE MORAL FABRIC OF OUR COUNTRY AND DEGRADE OUR VALUES. WHICH TRANSLATES TO WEAKENING U S A.

AT THIS RATE, GOOGLE MAY WELL BECOME A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY.

[nomoregoog]

STOP USING GOOGLE. GOOGLE IS DANGEROUS FOR KIDS

ROME WAS NOT DESTROYED BY OUTSIDERS, BUT BY INSIDERS WHO LOST MORAL VALUES.

GOOGLE IS TRYING TO DESTROY THE MORAL FABRIC OF OUR COUNTRY AND DEGRADE OUR VALUES. WHICH TRANSLATES TO WEAKENING U S A.

AT THIS RATE, GOOGLE MAY WELL BECOME A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY.

[nomoregoog]

STOP USING GOOGLE. GOOGLE IS DANGEROUS FOR KIDS

ROME WAS NOT DESTROYED BY OUTSIDERS, BUT BY INSIDERS WHO LOST MORAL VALUES.

GOOGLE IS TRYING TO DESTROY THE MORAL FABRIC OF OUR COUNTRY AND DEGRADE OUR VALUES. WHICH TRANSLATES TO WEAKENING U S A.

AT THIS RATE, GOOGLE MAY WELL BECOME A THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY.

[nomoregoog]

Lets STOP using google. It is getting dangerous for our kids. Rome was not destroyed by outsiders, but by insiders who propagated immoral values. Google is trying destroy the moral fabric of our Country and degrade our values, which translates to weakening USA. At this rate, Google may well become a threat to national security.

[nomoregoog]

Lets STOP using google. It is getting dangerous for our kids. Rome was not destroyed by outsiders, but by insiders who propagated immoral values. Google is trying destroy the moral fabric of our Country and degrade our values, which translates to weakening USA. At this rate, Google may well become a threat to national security.

[gloriamundi]

Yeah. Go back to AOL which routinely "looses" e-mail updates from non-Christian websites.

I guess you people would rather risk having your gay children (AND YOU DO AND WILL HAVE AT LEAST SOME)spend their lives in self hate and depression or die of AIDs by engaging in desperate and clandestine sexual encounters, rather than to allow them settle down to a safe, happy, secure life with someone they love, because they love someone of the same ***.

Y''all still haven''t explained how gay marriage hurts you!

If your god is so powerful he will be able to differentiate what you think of as a "legitimate" union from what you think of a "legitimate" union.

Maybe you are just insecure about your own marriages?

[gloriamundi]

Why don''t you xtians quit persecuting gay people and go do something Jesus actually commanded you to do. There''s lots of suffering in the world that you could be working to alleviate, but you blindly go about creating more suffering instead.

I challenge a single one of you to explain how gay marriage hurts you!

By the way, I''m straight. But I have lots of gay friends, and you are making them suffer.

[caeric]

As I said, rational thought and fanatical christians don''t mix well. The hysterics posted since my last post are typical responses from that set.

Gloriamundi, the examples you posted are all too common in a nation filled with that kind of religious hate. It''s unfortunate that those who think they know God can cause so much harm and pain.

If they had even a hint of the real truth they would know better. Instead, they can only slavishly wave their Bibles around, spewing forth spittle and hatred and abuse, and trying to prove they''re right with circular logic, proving nothing at all and not understanding why thinking people reject them.

They are the sadducees and pharisees of our time and don''t even realize it.

[gloriamundi]

Thanks Caeric.

Someone needs to explain to the Christians that there is more than one good book out there.

The original meaning of the word "***" was "a bundle of sticks" but it came to take on another meaning during the persecution of witches, because the Christians persecuted gay people too. So they would shout "Throw another *** on the fire." I know some of you think that''s funny.

Speaking of Rome, Christianity became the official state religion of Rome in the 3rd century AD after emperor Constantine boiled his wife alive and the Christians were the only sect to forgive him.

Go look it up. Like I said, there is more than one good book. As long as Christians remain ignorant of their own history, they can pretend some kind of moral superiority.

[guysdigdirt]

I still don''''t understand the anti-gay marriage position. I would like to say to those people: Even though you don''''t socialize your kids to be gay, a certain percentage will be born with the inclination anyway. Does your version of god really give you the right to persecute them and ruin their lives?
Posted by gloriamundi

Gloria, wake up call. It is not about telling people they cannot be ggay. It is about keeping the meaning of a word what it is and always has been. A union between one man and one woman.

Why do the sam-ssex couples want to be married? Why can''t they be happy being different? There is no way in the world being married will make them normal.

Let''s talk about why marriage should stay one man and one woman.
-If it is changed there will be other frivilous lawsuits for religious leaders not marrying a same-sexx couple.
-Religious doctors will be sued for not inseminating women who do not have the inclination to get the sperm from a man.
-Religious adoption agencies will be forced to close or have to go against their own beliefs.

The list could go on and on.

Why not come up with your own union, call it what you like or just go with the "domestic partnership" that already gives every right "marriage" does to the couple.

[caeric]

Every single ''marriage'' in this nation consists of the religious portion and the civil portion. Unfortunately, the two have become rolled into one.

''Marriage'' has a connotation of ''religion'' and is a word over which Christians mistakenly believe they have sole ownership. Christianity is not the only religion in the US, so any union ceremony blessed by any religion can rightly be called ''marriage''.

The ''civil'' portion is recognized by government and would be the same regardless, so any lawsuits would be brought through this avenue. Typically, lawsuits like those you mentioned would only move forward if the religious organization in question receives funding from a public/governmental source.

By the way, other than the problems caused by living in a society that condemns and hates, *** are happy and VERY normal. Marriage is just a step towards equality.

[guysdigdirt]

By the way, other than the problems caused by living in a society that condemns and hates, *** are happy and VERY normal. Marriage is just a step towards equality.
Posted by Caeric

How is marriage a step towards equality? Will that be one more step towards make ggays normal? The fact is they are not the norm.

[guysdigdirt]

Christianity is not the only religion in the US, so any union ceremony blessed by any religion can rightly be called ''''marriage''''.
Posted by Caeric

If you look in the dictionary you will find the word marriage means a man and a lady. Not any union of two people.

mar7riage /%u02C8mfr%u026Ad%u0292/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mar-ij] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
%u2013noun 1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.

Why do you and the other pro-gayy- marriage people want to change the definintion of a word to suit your purposes? Why not come up with your own word? Will that make the ggay couple feel straight?

[caeric]

Marriage equality is one more type of equality.

Using the dictionary definition proves nothing. Words and meanings of words change through time, and dictionaries add and update words and meanings of words yearly.

Besides, the meaning itself won''t change, just the belief that some people have that they and their particular religion own the word itself.

In the end, whether you like it or not, we will call it what it is: Marriage

G a y s ARE normal, in that homosexual behavior is found throughout nature, nations and history. Normal is behaving as one is meant (genetically, biologically, emotionally) to behave. *Abnormal* is going against just those things, which is what many in this nation would have g a y s do. Just because *you* don''t believe it is normal does not make it any less so.

Really, we should not even be having these discussions because in this nation, every single person should be treated equally under the law. How many decades and centuries of prejudice do we have to endure, even with a Constitution that supposedly speaks against such things?

[caeric]

And so we come full circle, to another example of those who have some strange aversion to rational thought.

[fetuskarate]

most excellent. Further proof that google is f*cking amazing.

[eggy1620]

CNET needs to hire a more literate staff. That title is a triple negative! Without reading the article, can one tell if Google is for same gender marriage, or against it?

[guysdigdirt]

G a y s ARE normal, in that homosexual behavior is found throughout nature, nations and history. Normal is behaving as one is meant (genetically, biologically, emotionally) to behave. *Abnormal* is going against just those things, which is what many in this nation would have g a y s do. Just because *you* don''''t believe it is normal does not make it any less so.
Posted by Caeric

And just because you feel being homossexual is normal, does not make it so. Let''s conduct an experiment, well we will not have to actually do it as we both know what the outcome will be. Here goes.

Let''s get together a large number of homosexxuals and put them on an island with all the creature comforts they desire. Then lets see how many generations that community will last. I would guess there will not be a second generation. If they can reproduce in their unions, then I would accept your arguement that they are normal. But we both know they cannot.

If ggays must be married to be normal, then they are admitting they are not normal, but seek to have what straight people have in their pursuit of seeming normal.

I do care what they do in their lives, but do not shove it down my throat. If they do succeed in continuing to be married in the state of California then their marriages must be taught to young children as being as normal as a real marriage. This is shoving it down my children''s throats. there is no arguement you can make against that.

[guysdigdirt]

My mistake, previously I had written I cared what they do in their lives, I do not.


I do NOT care what they do in their lives, but do not shove it down my throat. If they do succeed in continuing to be married in the state of California then their marriages must be taught to young children as being as normal as a real marriage. This is shoving it down my children''''s throats. there is no arguement you can make against that.

[guysdigdirt]

Answer for me a question I asked earlier.

What equality will being married give the same-ssex couples? Every right a married couple has is alloed and bestowed by a domestic partnership, every single right! Why is the word marriage so important?

You might ask me why it is so important to me. I have answere some of those reasons already in my previous posts. If you do not get an idea from there then tell me what the problem is and I will do my best to help you.

[caeric]

Guysdigdirt:

Your ''island experiment'' does not take into account the fact that there have always been homosexuals, no matter what each society thinks of them or names them or how they even see them (for example, some past societies have seen them as a third gender). There always will be homosexuals. They are a natural occurrence in any population, in approximately the same proportion of the population as left-handed people. No matter what happens on that island, the world population will continue to produce homosexuals.

Why? Genetics, biology... even, it is sometimes thought, as natures way of attempting to control an exploding population. *All* *completely* *natural*.

You have been taught that it is wrong, by this society. There have been many other societies that have said little one way or the other, or have outright accepted it and felt that homosexuals (of course, that word was not used) were special and to be cherished. The nature has not changed, only the societal view.

I can''t be any more clear than that with the limitations of this board. If you can''t understand how homosexuality is a naturally occurring phenomena from that you''ll have to come to that enlightenment later.

I''ll address marriage in the next post.

[caeric]

As for marriage:

It matters because of a number of things:

Nobody, no religion, owns the word marriage. There is no logical reason for it not to be used.

The word ''marriage'' is not needed to prove normalcy (we''ve already established normalcy in the last post), but as a measure of equality.

If you have never experienced inequality (i.e. if you are a white heterosexual christian man), you will have a hard time understanding why it is important.

We have long ago established in this nation that ''separate but equal'' is NOT equal (see Jim Crow laws). Have we not learned from our past?

As for children, they should be taught that love is good and hate is bad. Gender should not be a part of that equation.

[tipsyinct]

Why is the word marriage so important?
Posted by guysdigdirt at 12:26 PM : Oct 01, 2008

Because *** you that''s why. If the word is not important then why do you care? and as for your kids they WILL be growing up in a society where there are gay people.....and straight people and white people and black people and asian people and Hispanic people and dare I say it? CANADIANS!!! It IS the norm to be so diverse in our race, our thinking, our likes, dislikes and who we love. Thats what normal is, NOT a straight white male, a straight white female, and 2.5 straight white kids. If you don''t think your kids should grow up with that kind of normalcy, lock them in your basement. The word marraige is so important because we live in the land of the free, and it is fought for because its also the home of the brave. (wow good line ::pats self on back::)

[charlieot]

...Let''''s get together a large number of homosexxuals and put them on an island with all the creature comforts they desire. Then lets see how many generations that community will last. I would guess there will not be a second generation. If they can reproduce in their unions, then I would accept your arguement that they are normal. But we both know they cannot.

If ggays must be married to be normal, then they are admitting they are not normal, but seek to have what straight people have in their pursuit of seeming normal.

I do care what they do in their lives, but do not shove it down my throat. If they do succeed in continuing to be married in the state of California then their marriages must be taught to young children as being as normal as a real marriage. This is shoving it down my children''''s throats. there is no arguement you can make against that.

Posted by guysdigdirt at 12:20 PM : Oct 01, 2008

gdd...Your "experiement" fails to include the possibility (likelihood?) that members of the community will cross gender boundaries for procreation as a necessity. Or are you assuming that you will only populate the island with only one gender? Being g*a*y does not make people stupid; obviously there would be a vested interest in continuing the species.

Teaching that their marriages are *not* real marriage is shoving your view down the throats of *my* children. Do you have any more right to do that than I do to force another viewpoint?