Shared publicly  - 
Chris Evans's profile photoCasey Keller's profile photoGrant “gksmithlcw” Smith's profile photoTora Mulligan's profile photo
Milty C
Its disappointing that google is actively involved in political issues. 
Actually, I find it wonderful that they are.  Unlike many other corporate-based political involvement  Google has taken on the notion of social responsibility over bottom line.  

If a company is the sum of its employees, it must act in the interest of those employees.  It must foster a better world for them.  It serves the employees and it produces benefits it can reap itself.  It is in the best interest of the company to support the equality of its talent, workers, and its customers.

When I make a commitment to a series of purchases or an ecosystem, I want to know if the company values me as must as my dollar.
+Milty C I'm sorry that equal rights isn't an important enough issue for you to be OK with a company getting involved in politics over.

Although I would consider this more of a moral issue that has unfortunately crossed over into politics.  Morally, why the hell is it taking so long to make things equal for EVERYONE?!

I agree with +Casey Keller 
Milty C
I support full legal unions for gay couples, but i dont think they should be able to get married. The correct decision on this issue is not so self evident to justify google to get involved. 
+Milty C While I will respect you for upholding your personal beliefs, I will not subscribe to the notion of second class citizenry.  To make a distinction between marriage and legal unions is equivalent in nature to the "separate but equal" we held before.  Differentiating by definition is not equating.
That marriage equality has become political is the problem. Google is simply standing for human rights, and I support that stand 100%. Separate but equal was wrong for blacks in the US, and it's wrong for GLBT, a well.
Its nobody's place to tell someone they can't marry someone they love. Get over yourself and be happy for those who have found love in this crazy world.
+Chris Evans well, I certainly wasn't saying that nobody else should continue the my eyes, the hater was put in his place, and I had nothing to add beyond a thank you for having the video shared.
+Milty C it's disappointing to me that the separation of church and state is a bunch of bullshit. You'll survive gay marriage, I promise. 
I could care less about Gay marriage.. I want to outlaw straight marriage.. its been making peoples lives horrible for years...   and of course promote Panda/Human relations..    thanks for sharing the video Cory  :)
I guess I'm a little late to the party, but...
+Milty C #1 I don't mind it on principle, but I wish it was a different one. I usually dismiss it because Mountain View is in the San Francisco area.
+Kevin O'Quinn Yes, it is a moral issue.  Thank you for recognizing that.
+Milty C #2 I'm not fully decided, but I think I agree with you.
+Casey Keller and +Chris Evans I fail to see the similarities between the "separate but equal" idea from Plessy v. Ferguson and civil unions beyond a superficial level.  A person's race is determined by genetics alone.  Homosexuality (or bisexuality) has genetic factors in its causes, but genetics alone isn't enough; one's experiences are at least as important.  Also, "the leopard can't change his spots," but I've heard of some gay people who, with a fair amount of work and support, become heterosexual.  A trait you can change shouldn't be compared too much to a trait you can't change (ignoring plastic surgery, skin diseases, etc.).
+Christopher Coleman I assume you're referring to +Milty C as "the hater."  Nothing he has said is hateful.
+Cory Streater What do you mean by "separation of church and state"?  When I use that phrase, I usually contrast Middle Eastern countries and their oppression of non-Muslims and the UK's Church of England with the US, in which the government can't (constitutionally) discriminate based on religion.  You may be confusing it with "separation of religious convictions and politics," an idea that holds less water than a colander.  And yes, we would survive.  We would also survive if Google announced an end to all Android development, but that doesn't necessarily make it OK. 
+Joseph Collins My reference to "separate but equal" was not in reference to Plessy v. Ferguson, although I commend you for seeing the correlation.  My reference was actually to Brown v. The Board of Education (1954) and the demonstrated psychological impact on the disenfranchised.

In regards to nature v. nurture, I have yet to see enough data show that there is a crossover point.  Acting is acting.  Denial is denial.  Not to suggest that non-heterosexualities are diseases, but they are treated like them.  There is is the school of thought that with therapy, intervention, and will, these people can overcome the "addiction".  However, time and time again we have shown that an alcoholic is an alcoholic even if they have been years from the bottle.   The concept of transitioning of sexuality is nothing more than example of the psychological impact created by the stigma of inequality.   
Sorry, +Joseph Collins , but I don't believe for a second that anything in one's surroundings can influence being gay or straight. So those so-called hetero cures smack of nothing more than denial.
Gay marriage just passed in Washington. The good news is that God did not blow the state up, and everyone so passionately against it will be totally unaffected.
Congrats to Washington. I read something the other day about a constitutional challenge from the federal government to California's Proposition 8. I hope it's successful.
Now if we can overturn the travesty of Amendment One in North Carolina.
+Cory Streater God won't blow up the state immediately.  It surely is some sort of sign of Christ returning or something though.  :p
Wait....god will only blow up the state after Christ gets here?
Add a comment...