4 ms·

"According to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are 1,138 statutory provisions in which marital status is a factor in determining

"According to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are 1,138 statutory provisions in which marital status is a factor in determining benefits, rights, and privileges."[1] He donated money to a cause to prevent those 1,138 benefits, rights and privileges being available to gay couples. He hasn't changed his mind, explained himself etc. He has issued a statement saying Mozilla employees will get benefits, rights and privileges within the company equally. But those same employees (not to mention Mozilla's user/customer base) also have lives outside of the company. It is very easy to see how that appears contradictory to mozilla's values, as well as calling into doubt his suitably going forward. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of_marriages_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of...

levosmetalo 13y ago
Well, then change those 1,138 statutory provisions. Just remove the word "marriage" from the mix and replace it with, eg. "registered union" or something, and be done with the discussion. Everyone would have the same right. The things would be much easier if we just stopped redefining common words with new meaning to suit someone's agenda. Marriage was always, at least in western culture a relation between a man and a woman. If you want that gay people have the same legal benefits as hetero couples, do it the right way, but don't try to force everyone that "marriage" should now have different meaning. I have the same issue against FSF redefining the meaning of "free" in software world and pretending that they have right to force their meaning of the word to everyone else. They don't. And, btw, about that "registered union" that should replace "marriage" in legal documents ... just don't limit the number of people in there. Better yet, don't limit it only to people. Why wouldn't someone be allowed to "marry" or "register" a goat, if he likes so? And please, also drop age limits. Why wouldn't 13 year old girl have a right to "marry" another 45 years old woman, 52 years old man and their 4 years old horse? We should all have the same right, without any restrictions? Right?
- mkr-hn 13y ago
  I'm all for further strengthening the proper separation of church and state, but that's another much more difficult fight with little support. I'd like to have the option of marrying someone in the legal sense (with all the rights and responsibilities) in my own state within my lifetime.

levosmetalo 13y ago

Well, then change those 1,138 statutory provisions. Just remove the word "marriage" from the mix and replace it with, eg. "registered union" or something, and be done with the discussion. Everyone would have the same right. The things would be much easier if we just stopped redefining common words with new meaning to suit someone's agenda. Marriage was always, at least in western culture a relation between a man and a woman. If you want that gay people have the same legal benefits as hetero couples, do it the right way, but don't try to force everyone that "marriage" should now have different meaning. I have the same issue against FSF redefining the meaning of "free" in software world and pretending that they have right to force their meaning of the word to everyone else. They don't. And, btw, about that "registered union" that should replace "marriage" in legal documents ... just don't limit the number of people in there. Better yet, don't limit it only to people. Why wouldn't someone be allowed to "marry" or "register" a goat, if he likes so? And please, also drop age limits. Why wouldn't 13 year old girl have a right to "marry" another 45 years old woman, 52 years old man and their 4 years old horse? We should all have the same right, without any restrictions? Right?

mkr-hn 13y ago
I'm all for further strengthening the proper separation of church and state, but that's another much more difficult fight with little support. I'd like to have the option of marrying someone in the legal sense (with all the rights and responsibilities) in my own state within my lifetime.