Daily Kos

View Story | 28 comments

  •  here's some more shouting for you! (none / 0)

    You need to read more thoroughly about this matter first, before you try and suggest that Microsoft isn't being political on this issue. A company that has long been a supporter of gay rights, a company that showed other corporations that being supportive of gay employees was the right thing to do, has suddenly decided that being supportive of gay employees isn't the right thing to do anymore. They've been brainwashed and scared by right wing religious extremists who are worried they are going to somehow estrange their Christian employees, by having had extended benefits to their gay employees, which they've been doing for years! And then they've extended a complete lack of support for a state law that they've previously supported in the past, when they didn't even need to. Now, enlighten us, how is that not political?

    And if that doesn't qualify as a "thing to get agitated and fight for", as in, civil fucking rights for people just because of sexual preferences, who shouldn't even have to worry about whether or not they somehow "deserve" them regardless of what their job is, then maybe you should give us a clue as to something, oh, less annoying or bothersome to fight for?

    Maybe you would be a "shouter" too if you had to constantly fight against bigotry and homophobia and right wing religious extremists all the time. Some of us get a little bit hoarse having to yell at people like you who say you "get it" but obviously don't, when we're busy having to yell at bigots and religious zealots and politicians and every other douchebag who keep trying to tell us we're less than human just because of our sexuality. It's the 21st century, not the Dark Ages, but it seems like a whole lot of people want it to be the Dark Ages all over again.

    by mrradon on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 01:17:16 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  thank you (none / 0)

      for putting this so well. Clearly realitybasedjoe's reality is rather different from that inhabited by you and me (and many, many others). Perhaps realitybasedjoe will share with us whether he thinks there are any issues worth 'shouting' about...?

      by ianrs on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 03:08:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, (none / 0)

        I too would like to know. What is worth shouting about, RealityBasedJoe?

        I curious - I'm too lazy to go get the link - as to your underlying stance on both the issue of gay rights, and this particular piece of legislation that Microsoft has done a complete 180 on that you yourself also said in a previous Microsoft diary of a few days ago, that you wished they had supported this bill, as you're a supporter of gay marriage.

        Which in itself is ironic because now you're saying they shouldn't take any stance, but they did - going against what they've traditionally done - and taken a non-progressive political stance.

        And an answer that wasn't a basic shoulder shrug would be more appreciated.

        And if you would, also elaborate on what you said here...

        But that's beside the point.  The truth of the Microsoft situation is, aside from the usual corporation weasel-out-of-things-speak that's not really anything to begrudge them for, they've decided to not get political about this issue, and that's not the worst thing in the world.  They're far from being the 'bad guys' worth our time to attack.

        ...because well - they did get political about it. Initially, it was a progressive movement towards diversity and equal rights - now it's become a political stance, based on the woes of the religious right.

        My signature beat up your signature.

        by Stand Strong on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:25:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And for what it's worth, RealityBasedJoe (none / 0)

          already I have seen you troll rated up the wazoo for some things you say in other diaries and Open Threads. And seeing you as the first outside commentor on this diary, I immediately was on guard for what you have to say.

          But I haven't rated you yet because I'm curious as to what you're standpoint is.

          I can't tell if you're conservative, central, liberal, or really anything. You haven't posted any diaries and a lot of your comments have gotten low marks.

          But I'm still willing to listen, if you're willing to step up to the plate.

          My signature beat up your signature.

          by Stand Strong on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 05:38:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Heh (none / 0)

          ""I too would like to know. What is worth shouting about, RealityBasedJoe?""

          In politics, very few things - Shouting just generally indicates a lack of self control and an unawareness of how to present oneself decently.

          ""I curious - I'm too lazy to go get the link - as to your underlying stance on both the issue of gay rights,""

          My position is pretty much a mirror of Andrew Sullivan's.  I support gay marriage wholeheartedly.  Not a big fan of hate crime laws, in that in reality the costs of going down that slippery slope outweigh the benefits.  A big fan of equalization under the law in all its forms.  All the costs, all the benefits.  All avenues should not descriminate.

          ""and this particular piece of legislation that Microsoft has done a complete 180 on that you yourself also said in a previous Microsoft diary of a few days ago, that you wished they had supported this bill, as you're a supporter of gay marriage. ""

          Read my actual comment -- I didn't make it nearly so simple.  I said that I support the bill, and so in my heart I have a simpleminded notion of "It'd be nice if everyone everywhere supported it", but in my head I know it's not a corporation's place to get involved in this sort of thing.

          ""Which in itself is ironic because now you're saying they shouldn't take any stance, but they did - going against what they've traditionally done - and taken a non-progressive political stance.""

          Going against what they've traditionally done by withdrawing themselves is not 'taking a stance'.  It's going from 'a stance' to 'an absence of a stance'.

          ""...because well - they did get political about it. Initially, it was a progressive movement towards diversity and equal rights - now it's become a political stance, based on the woes of the religious right.""

          And now they feel it's better if they're not political.  Nothing wrong with that, because it wasn't their role as a corporation to begin with.

          You have this very odd notion in your head that once they're political about it, they must be political about it forever more, and cannot backtrack out of politics.

          I bomb atomically / Socrates' philosophies and hypotheses can't define how I be droppin' these.

          by RealityBasedJoe on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 09:07:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  also (none / 0)

      meant to rate you 4, but have not yet got hang of the technicologicalololgy.

      by ianrs on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 03:12:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Let's see. (none / 0)

      ""You need to read more thoroughly about this matter first, before you try and suggest that Microsoft isn't being political on this issue. A company that has long been a supporter of gay rights, a company that showed other corporations that being supportive of gay employees was the right thing to do, has suddenly decided that being supportive of gay employees isn't the right thing to do anymore.""

      And there's nothing wrong with their choice to do that, if it means they're not involving the law.

      If they're changing company policy towards their employees in terms of compensation, that is risible.  But changing their policy of which laws they support to a more neutral path is not, since it's not really their place to begin with.

      ""They've been brainwashed and scared by right wing religious extremists who are worried they are going to somehow estrange their Christian employees, by having had extended benefits to their gay employees, which they've been doing for years! And then they've extended a complete lack of support for a state law that they've previously supported in the past, when they didn't even need to. Now, enlighten us, how is that not political?""

      It's precisely not political -- it's withdrawing themselves from a culture war they shouldn't have been involved in to begin with.

      What benefits they offer their own employees is important, and worth fighting for -- but they shouldn't be getting involved in lobbying for cultural change laws.

      ""And if that doesn't qualify as a "thing to get agitated and fight for", as in, civil fucking rights for people just because of sexual preferences, who shouldn't even have to worry about whether or not they somehow "deserve" them regardless of what their job is, then maybe you should give us a clue as to something, oh, less annoying or bothersome to fight for?""

      It's how you fight for it.  When African Americans fought for civil rights in this country, they protested wearing their Sunday best.

      You protest with, in this case, childish behavior.

      ""Maybe you would be a "shouter" too if you had to constantly fight against bigotry and homophobia and right wing religious extremists all the time. Some of us get a little bit hoarse having to yell at people like you who say you "get it" but obviously don't, when we're busy having to yell at bigots and religious zealots and politicians and every other douchebag who keep trying to tell us we're less than human just because of our sexuality. It's the 21st century, not the Dark Ages, but it seems like a whole lot of people want it to be the Dark Ages all over again.""

      So if I don't agree with you on your methods, I don't "get it".  Way to win supporters to your side with that tactic, chief.

      Keep in mind:  Your opinions are not monolithic.  Hell, according to one figure I read, 25% of gays voted for Bush.

      When it comes to issues such as outing, or whether corporations should lobby for cultural change laws, you are not the sole arbiter of morality.

      I bomb atomically / Socrates' philosophies and hypotheses can't define how I be droppin' these.

      by RealityBasedJoe on Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 09:01:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

View Story | 28 comments