Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Microsoft: Prepare to defenestrate!

From AP:

"Microsoft Corp. may rethink its decision to withdraw support for state legislation that would ban discrimination against gays and lesbians, Chairman Bill Gates says. In an interview with The Seattle Times, Gates said he was surprised by the fierce criticism that followed the company's decision to no longer back a state gay rights bill it had supported in previous years."

Yes, there's something wrong with that. Microsoft was once a leading corporate defender of same-sex relationships, at a time when it wasn't exactly popular to take such stances (not that it is now, to be sure, though it's becoming increasingly more acceptable to do so -- i.e., to reject intolerance). Given Microsoft's relatively liberal past, I'm not yet prepared to give up on them -- and, besides, I'm not one to boycott lightly -- but I understand that this may be yet another reason to switch to Apple (as Mac users have been trying to persuade me to do for years, despite the convenience of Windows). It's just so pathetic -- and disappointing, despite low expectations to start with -- to see the world's most powerful company, and the world's richest man, succumb to such pressure and back away from doing the right thing.

Bookmark and Share


  • Personally,I despise Microsoft AND its products,AND the absurd contention that homosexual orientation is any more an excuse for homosexual activity than alcoholism is an excuse for getting drunk.

    I don't see maintaining a public policy that heterosexual relationships are exclusively normative as "intolerance",any more than property rights are institutionalized bigotry toward kleptomaniacs.Securing people from hate crimes is one thing;but acquiescing to absurd claims of "equality" is simply going too far.

    I say this as a fanatically anti-death-penalty,pro-abortion-on-demand,pro-national-health-insurance liberal;I am not religious (nor am I atheist) and consider the absurdity of sexual activity between persons of the same sex a matter of secular common sense.All individuals are celibate by default,and only an opposite-sex attraction is capable of constituting a legitimate reason for departing from that state.

    I discovered your blog because you seemed one of the few following the papal conclave who wasn't an anti-abortion sectarian zealot,but this is one issue on which the Catholics ARE right.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:14 PM  

  • wow. interesting... "celibate by default"? "absurdity"? you have GOT to elaborate on these comments, louis e., if you expect me to listen to them. why is only opposite-sex and not same-sex attraction a legitimate reason for departing from celibacy? and if celibacy is the default then why is it an issue for the church (or anyone else for that matter) at all? are homosexuals sociopathic? are heterosexuals sociopathic when they have sex or are attracted to one another? is sex only for procreation (and if celibacy is the default how does reproduction and the incredible drive to reproduce fit in?)? why does attraction to the same sex rather than the opposite sex make claims of equality absurd? How are YOU defining tolerance, then? SPEAK UP cause I'm having trouble hearing you.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 1:21 PM  

  • Celibacy is how we all grow up;more than self-indulgence is needed to justify departing from it.The SPECIES needs people to reproduce for the SPECIES to survive,but for individuals it's a matter of option.To restrict sexual activity to the purpose of procreation is too limiting,while to open it beyond opposite-sex couples is not limiting enough.Reproduction is the design purpose of sexuality,the pleasure aspects are a biological bribe built into it;but reason should rule instinct,and while not all actions of a sexual nature need reproductive purpose,to depart from the basic male+female template is intrinsically irrational.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:27 PM  

  • But isn't restricting ourselves to rationality vs. instinct denying a basic part of who we are and therefore not living the in the fullness of our experience as human beings? poetry, art, music - these are things that are part of the human expression of our instinct, our irrationality. If we were meant to live as rational beings and only rational beings then why have emotional responses to stimuli at all? What is the point of existence? To live out our lives as expediently and efficiently and rationally as possible? or to explore the full range of our humanity and to try to find, through this exploration, some meaning in it all? I think you can guess my answer. We 'grow up' quite IRRATIONALLY - babies, toddlers and teenagers are VERY irrational and emotionally motivated creatures but we try to 'grow up' and to suppress these emotional impulses. ANd to deny any responsibility for the rest of the SPECIES and its continuation and betterment in favour of an ascetic individual is, to me, selfish and short sighted. Thanks for elaborating on your thoughts, louis e. You have made me think, even if I do disagree with you.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 12:00 PM  

  • By Blogger BRSMAN, at 3:42 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home