成人论坛

It's good to see that big business can still care about the local community and society. A bit of good news for a change!

It's important that people come alongside with support for Proposition 8. Too much hangs in the balance to let it fall the way these titans are backing it.

Real legal and social implications for society hang in the balance.

Its good to see that the civil rights message of this is getting through to the big companies.

I'm a straight white male, and I'm amazed how small minded someone can be about the rights people who love each other should have.

Companies like Google and Apple influence the real world and can't stay out of the argument any more than they can say their headquarters presence doesn't affect the city it's in. So I'm glad they have become involved in the debate.

I've been mulling buying a Macbook for months. Think I will now.

A good reason for me to keep buying Apple and using Google and Gmail.

This is indeed a civil rights issue and much too important to sit on the fence. Glad someone is funding the opposition to this proposition in the face of bigotry and religious fundamentalism.

Google's motto is "Do no evil", and it's great to see them, and Apple, putting up money to protect human rights, and I can only hope it prompts more companies to follow suit and stand up for what's right.

Opponents of Prop 8 have latched on to the the phrase, "Equality for All." Unfortunately, the argument that Prop 8 will deprive gays of their "rights" is a straw man. Under California law, 鈥渄omestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits鈥� as spouses (Family Code 搂 297.5). Since Prop 8 will not change this, it is not clear what gays will be denied should Prop 8 pass. Whatever it is, it isn't rights.

Of course this is a civil rights issue. Whilst the laws in California do allow same-sex couples certain legal rights, there is a necessary social equality that MUST happen. Therefore, marriage is either equal to all legitimate relationships or it isn't. Good on Apple and Google for throwing their weight behind the "no to 8" campaign and standing up for fairness and tolerance in a hugely intolerant world.

As for those who wonder if it is a civil rights issue, ask yourself this: if a mixed race couple could get all their legal rights,m but were denied marriage due to the nature of their relationship, would it be a civil rights issue for them? Of course it would, as it is for gay and lesbian couples to ahve their relationship seen as rightly equal to heterosexual relationships.

It's not about rights; Any man with any woman who both choose to may be married (even if one or both of them at some point in the past has made a habit of entertaining sensual thoughts about people of their own gender). What popular terminology terms "sexual orientation" is much more a matter of cumulative choice than anything else. While there are enticements both ways, people naturally are attracted to those of the opposite gender. Some people, despite unfortunate pasts have chosen to have their lives turned around.

It is important to society to promote marriage between a man and a woman precisely because it creates the best opportunity for well-adjusted children in the rising generation.

While we ought to have compassion for all people, we need to remember those who do not presently have full voice--what about the children? What of their rights? Is it fair to them for the law to be indiscriminate in this way? Dare I ask, where do babies come from again?

While it's possible for children to recover from many things, is it fair to them to place them in an arrangement that is inherently less-able to provide for their developmental needs as people?

@Michael-ca

Your comment doesn't logically follow from the argument.

Marital status doesn't determine orientation.
Gay people are not going to give up being gay and get married and procreate simply because the state forbids homosexual marriage.

Homosexuals getting married will not only occur if there is an equal downturn in heterosexual marriage to balance the numbers. Promoting "marriage between a man and a woman" can occur equally as well regardless of what the gay community chooses to do.

Children have nothing to do with it either. The arguments for or against gay adoption have little if anything to do with gay marriage. Frank and Garry choosing to get hitched and have their relationship recognised by the state will not in any way "discriminate" against the hypothetical baby they may or may not be awarded in a future case.

It's typical of your objections that, whilst well written and coherent, they are at heart the empty grasping of someone who is letting prejudice ("unfortunate pasts") masquerade as thought.

Proposition 8 was passed today - a sad event and I sympathise with those effected. The only upshot is that society inexorably moves towards a time and a place where this kind of oppression will be looked upon with the disgust it so rightly deserves.

Not only that, Sam... but he's pulling out the tired old so-called argument of "it's a choice, not an inbuilt orientation", which as far as I'm concerned should render the entirety of the rest of the comment void. Totally ad hominem of me I know, but such ignorance and willingness to present ones own opinion / belief - however unfounded - as concrete fact really gets my back up. There's enough scientific study so far showing basic structural differences in the brains of hetero/homo people of the same gender (and some showing how similar areas resemble those of straight people of the opposite sex) - which for all we know so far may even affect basic, instinctive things such as responses to sex pheremones, as well as non-sexual interests, speech patterns, what-have-you - that I'm happy to dismiss the idea as idle bigotry, and to ask in all seriousness "what's your basis for that statement, so dismissive of another person's instincts and feelings?". That and having seen enough testimony of gays (if I may use that as a convenient all-encompassing term) and transsexuals describing having felt that way, or "different" from an early age, trying to fight against it and "go straight" (and inevitably failing, much as a straight person ACTUALLY "choosing" to be gay might), etc. If it were that much of a choice, would it be something you'd choose to do and profess in the face of being radically discriminated against, regularly insulted and made fun of, ostracised, disowned*, even attacked and in some cases murdered for it?

(* I must confess a mild personal interest over this point, having had a friend who was cut loose from the family home at 17 having come out to them... somehow his deep love of Grease wasn't a warning sign to them, though admittedly he didn't otherwise fit the stereotypical template. Not to mention a lesbian couple who I basically consider as married regardless because their home life just seems so damn *normal* ... the one whom I've known longest having tried several times at hetero relationships and never having them work, as the basic attraction simply wasn't there)

Call it a mental illness, a condition, an unnatural urge if you want, but don't be so callous as to label it as a concious choice so you can discriminate against others who don't fit your narrow little world-view and tell them it's "all their own fault" when things get nasty. That's a bully's way of going about their business, and I can only hope THAT's something ingrained and hard to fight also, rather than a shallow choice.

Damn it, now I'm going to have to do something physical to dispel the urge to smack the monitor. See, this IS one thing that you can choose to supress ...... until someone winds you up far enough that the urge becomes too great of course!

As for Prop 8 itself, I think it's a bad day for equality and equal rights, as well as slightly spoiling (temporarily?) the happiness of many devoted couples. But at the same time it is democracy in action, and shows that - sad as the situation may be - large parts of society just aren't ready for this sort of thing yet. But then, sometimes if it may be considered beneficial overall, a government has to force some things through (or block them). Maybe this will happen in future.

Personally, I don't know WHY gay/lesbian(/trans...) couples would WANT to get married, apart from the obvious legal benefits (... the only reason my dad and stepmother bothered with the whole tedious, expensive process!). It's already a fairly corrupt institution that has lost a lot of value. It still warms my heart to see an obviouly committed couple, particularly a pair I'd previously had doubts about, get together at the altar / registry desk and pledge themselves to each other, but it can seem almost like just a matter of course rather than a serious ceremony for some, and divorce is of course terribly rife making it somewhat less than "for life" anymore. A civil partnership could offer basically the same rights and benefits with a bit of tweaking but without as much drama. However, I'm not going to purposely obstruct them or rain on their parade if they love each other and that's what they truly want!