"isn't it normal for companies to buy politicians and pay lobbiest to do this sort of thing?" - That's usually a somewhat quiet thing, you don't see the lobbyists working. Google, Microsoft, Starbucks et al. aren't really interested in DOMA for their businesses. It's a PR campaign. Among younger people acceptance of homosexuality is on the rise. Even among younger evangelicals, and Google and Microsoft particularly are companies that need to look to the youngest of demographics. Let's face it the 70 + demographic is not really where Google and Microsoft and Starbucks (back in my day coffee was served only one way and cost 5 cents!) are making all their money. I think this is just more highly visible, and an easy way to score points among the politically involved segments of their consumer base. Heh. Thinking about it like that I'm surprised Apple isn't in on this, they're sort of, the most apt to use this kind of political activism as advertising.
I mean, on the one hand that kind of thing is really pretty insulting. LGBT rights shouldn't exist for the purposes of making money for Microsoft. On the other hand, it is a sign that the tide really has changed in the fight for LGBT rights. When powerful hegemonic interests get behind and start co-opting your movement as a publicity gimmick, you've certainly got some momentum. I still find this kind of cynicism kind of appalling.
@ orathiac and Draugnar - That "compromise" solution is not acceptable. It's the kind of half-assed "simple solution" that people not actually engaged with the issues would come up with. Do you not see how completely dismantling the institution of marriage, just to keep it out of the hands of gay people might be considered something of a slap in the face? And I mean, essentially you're just handing over the, real, actual tool to legitimizing a relationship in the eyes of society, marriage, to the religious people, and taking it away, not only from gays, but also the areligious. Help the religious right kill two birds with one stone. This "take marriage away from the government" is an insulting idea. The idea underlying gay marriage is to get society to acknowledge that they've been wrong, all along, that there is not, and has never been anything wrong with being gay, and it's about time we acknowledged that same sex relationships are not really substantially different from opposite sex relationships. The "give marriage to religions" solution, is kind of the opposite of that. It sends the message, "we were right all along about what a marriage should be, but we'll give all you...other people...something else, just, don't come near our way of doing things please." Instead of being an apology, it becomes an arrogant, insulting, magnanimous gesture. Sort of a "well let's throw them a bone" thing. And ultimately it only serves to preserve the existing inequalities and heteronormative biases of our society. Also it's based on a lie. Marriage has never been a strictly religious deal. It's always been a social, political institution, it's just that historically the church has been an instrument of the state, because the clergy was among the most literate social classes, and since every town or village in Europe had a church in it, the priests would be the most reliably literate people in town. And literacy, I think you'll find, is useful for record keeping.
Introducing a friend to diplomacy
)
)
)
)
)