Posted on 09/26/2008 4:43:40 PM PDT by andymin
"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."
(Excerpt) Read more at googleblog.blogspot.com ...
Google's really trying to get into morality? Look, it's all good to have personal opinions and all that, but come on. This doesn't even have to do with technology (if it was net neutrality, it would be one thing. But gay marriage???)”
Darn, title messed up. Oh well.
Google is staffed and run by homosexuals, maybe?
The only thing surprising about this is that they didn’t do something cutesy with the logo...umm, like two guys entwined with the two g’s in the middle and each other.
They’re all libs.
Now I know what God meant when in Romans 1:28. This is not about equality, it is about semantics and meaning. The gay lobby carefully made a deceptive argument and the depraved took it hook line and sinker. The meaning of a word is always discriminatory. For someone to be man, woman, blue-eyed, brown-eyed, smart, dumb, creative, hardworking, or lazy is to mean that he is not the opposite.
Maybe I don't want the word "doctor" to discriminate against those who haven't attained a MD or PhD. What would it mean if I legally changed it so that everyone over 40 could claim to be a doctor? I could claim it was discriminatory to only allow people to be called doctor if they had the intelligence and put in the hard work to get a PhD or MD. What about the word "virgin". Seems unfair that one foolish act could make that not apply to someone anymore. We could get a court to make us all virgins again if we wanted the title. The only thing harmed is the meaning of a word.
This whole gay "marriage" issue is an assault on a word--it is even more than that though, it is a desperate leftist battle through the government to try to alter reality itself. Marriage means, and always will mean a husband and a wife with the intention of the institution being the bearing and raising of the next generation. To change the legal definition of marriage to mean something different than reality is an exercise in futility. We may as well have a Proposition on the California ballot that rain is legally dry or fire is legally cold.
Almost completely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.