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.
However, while there are many objections to this proposition -- further
government encroachment on personal lives, ambiguously written text -- it
is the chilling and discriminatory effect of the proposition on many of
our employees that brings Google to publicly oppose Proposition 8. While
we respect the strongly-held beliefs that people have on both sides of
this argument, we see this fundamentally as an issue of equality. We hope
that California voters will vote no on Proposition 8 -- we should not
eliminate anyone's fundamental rights, whatever their sexuality, to marry
the person they love.
Posted by Sergey Brin, Co-founder & President, Technology
Monday, September 29, 2008
Google Opposes Proposition 8!
Google has officially come out against Proposition 8!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
LinkWithin
3 comments:
I just want you to know that the attack on Prop 8 you published in your corporate blog today was just too much. I know you don't care, but you need to know this matters. I'll never use Google again as my search engine. I'm removing all traces of Google from my computers, including the Google Desktop.
First of all, Prop 8 only seeks to restore the traditional definition of marriage which the voters approved in 2000 by over 60% with their vote on Prop 22, but which the California State Supreme Court improperly took away from us this past June. They never actually approved gay marriage. They didn't have the right to do so because, according to the California State Constitution, only the Legislature has the right to pass laws. What the Supreme Court did do was find unconstitutional some individual statutes that were revised by Proposition 22. Their decision left a number of regulations and statutes still in state law which, if they had really meant to 'approve' gay marriage and this effort had been done correctly, would also have had to be revised. But they couldn't do that because they are not the state's law-making body and we have a very strict separation of powers here in California. In other words, 'approving' gay marriage can only legally be done either by the California State Legislature or by a vote of the electorate through a ballot initiative, not by the State Supreme Court. They don't get to make law, which their decision improperly and incompletely attempted to do.
Second, you vastly underestimates the tremendous support for traditional marriage in this city. A couple months ago, within 24 hours of the announcement of so-called 'boycott' of the Manchester Hyatt Regency Hotel by a gay group that had been planning a demonstration for weeks because the owner of the hotel had donated money to support Proposition 8, proponents of Prop. 8 had gathered an equal number of supporters across the street to correct the misunderstandings about the ballot proposition that the other side was trying to spread.
In particular, you failed to mention that in the State of California, male-female couples can no longer be married as bride and groom. Not only do they have to fill out the marriage license form that now calls them "Party A" and "Party B," but they can't even have their marriage recorded with the State Office of Vital Records as Husband and Wife.
Most people are completely shocked to learn that a man and woman wishing to marry officially as husband and wife in California now are now forced to marry in some other state. Last month a couple in Placer County wrote “Bride” and “Groom” next to “Party A” and “Party B” on their marriage license form and it was rejected by the Office of Vital Records. To have their marriage recorded officially as bride and groom, they would have had to get married in some other state! That’s just plain ridiculous! A 'Yes' vote on Prop 8 would reverse this and allow couples to once again be married as husband and wife.
What's next? Gender-neutral birth certificates? This has just plain gone too far. A 'yes' vote on Proposition 8 will simply restore the traditional view of marriage most Californians respect and want without reversing the gains in appropriate rights provided to gay couples by existing domestic partnership laws.
I challenge you to open up your blog to feedback from the public, RIGHT THERE, beneath the blog. Allow us to comment right there. I dare you to really hear what people think about your stand on this issue. You seemingly only want to hear from those who agree with you! How dumb is that? And the fact that you have no way for people to really respond is so typical of Google.
Karen Grube
9/29/08 7:11 PM
Karen Grube...a big comment. I neither support nor oppose gay marriage. that's ONE individuals right. Whats the reason that you want to take that away. Just because it does not confirm to your religious believes.....or just because you don't like it. GROW UP.
As the parent of a Lesbian daughter, I want to thank you for your support in opposing Prop 8. Thank you for standing up for the rights of all Americans.
Ms. Grube,
You may remove Google from all your computers. In our family, we say that is "Cutting off your nose to spite your face." My husband and I will continue to support Google in all ways possible.
I am sorry that a couple were not able to use the words bride and groom on their license application, but I am sure that two people who truly love each other will be able to overcome such a hurdle. Just remember that if Proposition 8 is not defeated there are many very much in love people who will be denied their right to a marriage license.
Sorry, but you will not get my sympathy. My husband and I are happily married and our marriage is secure enough that it will not fall apart if same-sex partners marry.
Post a Comment