Gay-marriage advocates, aiming to show broad support as the U.S. Supreme Court takes up the issue for the first time, have enlisted Apple, Morgan Stanley and dozens of Republicans who once held top government positions…

The justices will hear arguments March 26 on California’s Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot initiative that halted gay marriage in the state after it was allowed for five months.

The corporate group, which also includes Facebook and Intel will argue in its brief that gay-marriage bans in 41 states harm workplace morale and undermine recruiting.

“No matter how welcoming the corporate culture, it cannot overcome the societal stigma institutionalized by Proposition 8 and similar laws,” the companies will argue.

The Republican brief will include Jon Huntsman Jr., the former presidential candidate and ex-governor of Utah; Christine Todd Whitman, a onetime New Jersey governor who ran the Environmental Protection Agency under President George W. Bush; and three ex-governors of Massachusetts in William Weld, Paul Cellucci and Jane Swift. Gary Johnson, the former New Mexico governor who ran for president last year as a Libertarian, is also part of the group…

A larger group of companies — more than 200, including Goldman Sachs — is also poised to side with gay- rights advocates in a second Supreme Court case, involving a federal law that defines marriage as a heterosexual union. Under that law, known as the Defense of Marriage Act, legally married gay couples can’t claim the federal tax breaks and other benefits available to opposite-sex spouses.

The companies in that case are part of a collection of more than 250 employers, including cities, counties and law firms.

Although the high court often ignores so-called friend-of- the-court briefs, at times they can shape the way some justices view a dispute. When the court upheld university affirmative action in 2003, the majority opinion relied on briefs filed by corporations and former military officers touting the benefits of racial diversity.

Overdue.



  1. msbpodcast says:

    No surprise there.

    Apple is led by Tim Cook, as fey a CEO as you can get without having to go to a parade.

    Morgan-Stanley are as big a bunch of cock-biters as you are likely to meet in the financial pool. They don’t discriminate. If you have money, they want it!

  2. Peppeddu says:

    Of course they all come together, that’s an easy one to support.

    Let’s see where they stand on something a tad more important… like… human rights in China.

    Ghost town anyone?

    • stormtrooper 651 says:

      I haven’t seen a corporation/government relationship this seamless and incestuous since Benito’s Fascism.
      Any companies that don’t slavishly toe the Administration’s party line better look out.

    • stormtrooper 651 says:

      I haven’t seen a corporation/government relationship this seamless and incestuous since Benito’s Fascism.
      Any companies that don’t slavishly toe the Administration’s party line better look out.

  3. The Monster's Lawyer says:

    Well, corporations are people so I guess they can be gay too.

  4. Mr Diesel says:

    Hershey?

  5. bobbo, with the panache of Steve Zissou says:

    Who cares who is for or against anything?

    The relevant issue is WHY?===>as in legal reasoning.

    Yea for my team, Boo for your team. Same as it always was.

    Same court that decided money doesn’t corrupt politics will decide whether or not something that has never existed anywhere at any time (?) will find it to be an inalienable right?

    Thats not activist at all.

  6. Rational Ranger says:

    Awesome!

    They’re helping to put together a list of companies that I don’t want to do business with!!!

    • Phydeau says:

      Smart idea Irrational Ranger… you might catch teh gay from them!

      • Guyver says:

        Smart idea Irrational Ranger… you might catch teh gay from them! –

        So morality is based on fear?!?!?! Dumb theory or simply intellectual dishonesty.

      • Rational Ranger says:

        Oh!!!

        Now you’re stereotyping me! I thought that was a hate crime!

        Where’s the PC police when you need them?

        • I'm ugly and my mother dresses me funny says:

          In Panama City, busting underage drinkers there for spring break.

    • shooff says:

      Good Luck with that. Goldman Saks pretty much underwrites every corporate bond offering. You will be very poor in material items.

      Fox has had multiple overtly gay story lines in every episode of Glee. I also saw my first Openly Gay commercial for the Kindle on Fox during Nascar.

      Guess you’ll turning off Fox News Channel and NASCAR.

    • yeeeeahright says:

      Never fails. Those who bash gays the most ALWAYS turn out to be closet queens. Thanks for outing yourself.

      • Mextli says:

        How old is that asshole saying? Please come up with something new so I can go “Ohhhh am I really gaaaaay?”

        • Dallas says:

          I’m sure you’re not gay. You’re just harbor inferior feelings but also because you’re an ordinary asshole.

          • pedro says:

            Do you know how pathetic you look trying to pick on heterosexuals?

            Go suck 1% dick to get your honey to give you his money (he should be the provider because nobody as stupid as you could get a nickel)

      • What? The moth is always drawn to the flame? says:

        Of course the gay bashers are secretly gay, and hate themselves for the way they are.

        If they were straight, they would be too lost in thoughts about their hetro interests to worry about guys taking themselves out of the competition for girls’ attention.

        I wish every guy, other than me, was gay; then I would have a larger pool of female candidates to select from.

      • Dallas says:

        Somewhat disagree. My guess it’s 30-50% have ‘conflicting urges’ to what mommie expects. The majority and the rest suffer an inferiority complex. Suppressing others to feel superior is easier than lifting themselves up.

        • pedro says:

          Sure DUHllass. Stop revealing to us your daily affirmations. You know, the ones you say to yourself to make you feel better & allow you to sleep at night.

          The worst part of it all is that that kind of “comeback” shows that you are still uncomfortable with yourself and you have to think that heterosexuals are secretly like you to be able to live with your mutation (your words, you said it was genetic)

  7. pedro says:

    Awwwww, there’s an editor that will have his dream come true very soon, how cute.

    • Guyver says:

      Awwwww, there’s an editor that will have his dream come true very soon, how cute.

      He probably can’t wait to have discussions about sexuality in the workplace now that government feels this is a human rights issue.

      Does that mean heterosexuals can talk about their sexuality in the workplace too? :)

  8. Phydeau says:

    It’s all about the Benjamins, my friends. The corporations don’t care about people’s moral values, only about making a buck. They’ve figured out that enough people are OK with gay marriage that they can make more bucks catering to them than to the anti-gay marriage people.

    Plan accordingly.

    • dusanmal says:

      It is indeed about Benjamins. However, not in a way you think. This is a perfect example of Fascist Economy pushed by the Progressives (Left and Right):
      1)Progressive corrupt politician is elected as he, behind the doors have promised goodies to corrupt corporations and they donated heavily. So far, so typical of any politician/corporation interaction.
      2)Progressive politician indeed gives benefits to corporations that have helped his election. So far, so typical.
      3)Now the Progressive catch: These politicians are not satisfied with monetary quid-pro-qua …. Nooo… Corporations now must actively support his ideological and political ideas. There is NO option to just donate or donate and be quiet. Even if corporation have donated, if it does not pull the ideological line – the hammer of regulatory and other burdens is ready to hit. Because they have lost leverage in giving money earlier… Essentially bullying with a force of Federal Government.

      That is how Nazi Germany worked. Public-private partnership is neo-nazi term for it (and their term for fascism is Progressivism). These companies know that they will not make a buck with this. But they are on the right side of the Bully in Charge. That is worth more than money.

    • Angel H. Wong says:

      This. Plus there’s several benefits of having gay employees over the straight ones:

      Single, gay male? No pesky wife to distract him. No time-sucking children. They’re perfect for overtime.

      Plus. Most of them don’t want to have kids unlike childless, (gay or straight) single women in their late thirties. It is much safer to invest in their education for the benefit of the company. You’re not going to get a “My biological clock is ticking I need to have a baby before it’s too late!” From gay men.

      Sounds sexist? Definitively. But if your job involves improving productivity at work it makes sense.

  9. shooff says:

    I support gay marriage for one reason:

    Gay Divorce. Hasn’t the Gay community observed the trials and tribulations of their straight friend’s divorces.

    The upside to “Gay” was just being able to walk away without a divorce battle. You are bringing the hell of divorce on yourselves. DUMB, DUMB, and Dumber.

    Divorce Lawyers are gonna make a killing in the Gay Divorce business.

    Careful what you wish for.

    I’m sure their are 1000′s of homosexuals who promised to marry their partners…if It ever became legal. I bet they are packing right now, cause they really don’t want to be married. When they made that comment they really thought no way it would ever happen. Uh Oh!

    • pedro says:

      I can only imagine the drama of one of those proceedings.

      • Mextli says:

        FTW

      • Anonymous Coward says:

        I have vague memories that the first gay couple in CA to marry after judicial fiat said “gay marriage is a Right” were also the first to file for divorce, or tried to anyways. Nobody had bothered to update the rules on Divorce, so only heterosexual couples could legally divorce at the time..

        I’m personally against gay marriage. Marriage’s only real purpose as far as Society is concerned is the breeding and raising of the next generation of hopefully productive society members. Anything beyond that is ancillary. That’s why all the traditional perks pf marriage, especially inheritance and those shared with the wife of the working husband who sacrifices her potential earnings to raise the next generation – thus the marriage benefits such as inheriting a deceased spouse’s property. Even in ancient Greece city states when/where gay sex was common, the city states still required the gay men to Breed an heir with their house slave (aka, female “wife”) to be able to pass on their possessions after death, as otherwise the state would take the possessions. No leaving your stuff to your gay lover was permitted to encourage the creation of future citizens.

        That said, now that there are so many straight married couples who refuse/don’t want children of their own in the last 2-3 decades, I would suggest treating them just like gay couples – no marriage benefits that involve wealth or money for the non-working spouse because they aren’t sacrificing sh@t for society.

        Maybe require an actual loin spawn be produced (straight) or adopted (both gay or straight) before any marriage benefits are gained beyond prenatal care. Until they produce (or adopt) loin spawn, limit them to passive “rights” like hospital visitation, the right to attend their spouse’s funeral, etc. Again, nothing that involves the transferring of wealth either between childless spouses (such as default lines of inheritance) or between an employer and the employee’s spouse (insurance coverage, retirement benefits, etc). Not being tied down by children, both spouses can work full time.

    • Dallas says:

      “I support gay marriage for one reason: Gay divorce”

      I believe you ! It’s refreshing when people admit they always think about misery for others. You might be an angry asshole , but you’re honest.

      • pedro says:

        You, on the other hand, are just an asshole.

        You are the one looking for “equality”! Enjoy your divorce, idiot! I want to be first in line to see your face when you get nothing.

  10. MikeN says:

    What is a gay union of a man and a woman?

    Trying to redefine marriage will inevitably weaken it, but then again that’s what certain people with an agenda want, and they are using the gays to advance it.

    • pedro says:

      That union is ok because it would be between a gay with sex change and a lesbian who did the same thing.

      And it will be blessed with sooo many kids… rabbits will be jealous.

    • Mayor Bloomburger says:

      “Trying to redefine marriage will inevitably weaken it”

      Stupid argument from someone who doesn’t understand how marriage or people work, but that doesn’t stop them from having a stupid opinion .

      My marriage is founded on an oath on God between two friends. I doubt “red-definition” will weaken marriage if it’s real, unless you don’t believe in oaths, or God, or friends. BTW, I’m married to a woman, smart-ass.

      I’m suuuuurrrrreee your the greatest husband of all time though.

      • pedro says:

        Another idiot bound to lose what he has because he has no idea what he has in the first place.

        And they say oversimplification makes thing easier to understand

        • Mayor Bloomburger says:

          You would presume to define what

          I have, you pompous toad.

  11. pedro says:

    How about that! The 1 per centers support gay marriage. Talk about cognitive dissonance from the liberuls in here.

    • Dallas says:

      We all know you just wanted to use ‘cognitive dissonance’ in a sentence. That’s why nobody cared. However, I think that was an improvement.

      • pedro says:

        In your case, cognitive dissonance is an euphemism for hypocrisy.

        Why don’t you join the wall street protests now, blog idiot?

  12. Benjamin says:

    Corporations are about making money. I don’t see how picking a side in a controversial issue advances that goal. I would never as a CEO alienate half of my customers by weighing in on this issue on the corporate level.

    Corporations are not allowed to get married yet, although we may have that soon. AT&T and T-mobile could get married and become “one flesh” and the justice department couldn’t block it as long as they do it in a state where the gay marriage legalization doesn’t specifically mention homosexuality. Saying that any two persons can get married will allow corporations to marry.

    • pedro says:

      They don’t get married because, as individuals, they behave like cave people: they just take over (in a hostile manner sometimes)

  13. Ya, ya says:

    It’s funny how absolutely NO ONE seems to be picking up on the REAL topic here.

    Finally! We have a group of people being discriminated against because they want the same “rights” that (among other reasons) our Internal Revenue Service has decreed they should not have. A decree that company after company and governmental entity after governmental entity have complied with through the years. A decree that isn’t exactly spelled out but one that starts with an ILLEGAL taxation of LABOR!

    You Constitution scholars may want to brush up on your facts since it is Constitutionally ILLEGAL to tax anyone on his(her) labor. So what do the powerful tax experts do? They call it “income” and tax THAT! Clear evidence that these elite powerful entities consider all the money in the world all theirs and how the rest of us married/unmarried gay/straight or whatever are merely BORROWING it at times.

    So, like I said, we finally have a group kind idiots saying they want the same benefits as anyone else willing to commit to a lifetime together. Of course, the powerful elite never even considered this and have even made decisive moves to exclude them from “the process” since gays/lesbians can not produce more serfs. But there it is. Nearly a century of UNEQUAL taxation perceived as “rights” and the argument is over marriage?!

    Like I said, kind IDIOTS!

    Any solution would be to end any and all official recognition of marriage by any government and leave it to the religious and other social leaders to decide. You’d think that our government would learn that exclusion of anyone from any “official” recognition along with any benefits that any such recognition carries is STUPID! Look at how long it took to get racial equality – and that’s just a tad easier to recognize!

  14. Mextli says:

    We just need to be “units” then each unit can do whatever it wants. No male/female/both/confused/whatever just units.

    CNN has a story recently about a young boy (6 years old I think) that has the gender of a girl. This has caused a lot of concern about using the girls bathroom at it’s school.

    I assume when it grows up it will want to marry a goat.

  15. This just reminds us that even people of questionable ethics can do the right thing when it suits their purpose. Just don’t make me take a look inside those briefs.

  16. Now Americans are getting a taste of the propaganda we have had in Canada. Its worse than an Amway meeting. Now matter what the topic on Canadian CBC government left wing radio the talk always leads to gay marriage and how wonderful it is. First of all “who cares”. Work hard , be productive to society and don’t bother me. Perhaps i am a neanderthal yet if i talked of my amorous adventures in the same manner I would be told to be quiet in the back seat of the car.

    • Dallas says:

      I can see how you feel you’re a Neanderthal but you’re on the right track as to how others see you.

      • pedro says:

        Oh idiot DUHllass, if only you knew how others see you.

        I first, I felt pity for you. But after seeing the real you… you cannot pity purposeful stupidity like yours.

  17. Glenn E. says:

    You know the US economy was been in bad shape, when all these companies go to such lengths to woo the 2 – 3% of the population, gay married couple might represent as potential customers. By that reasoning, they ought to support more Native American rights. If such a small percent of the total population, is enough for them to get worked up about. But I don’t see that happening.

  18. bracketcreep says:

    Let’s see: about 3% of the population is homosexual. How many of them want to get married? 20%? That’s .6% of the population affected by this issue.

    Yet you’d think it’s practically a national emergency based on all the spilled ink and loud public debate. I hear the drum beat most every day as if large swaths are being deprived of something necessary for survival.

    I can only conclude that it’s a manufactured wedge issue intended to let a particular political side smear those not enthusiastically for it as hopeless benighted morally-stunted bigots.

    I’m quite certain there are DNC strategists working on the next wedge issue to trot out to low information voters via a compliant news media and TV/Hollywood once global warming and gay marriage lose their steam.

    • pedro says:

      That pretty much sums it up.

    • Dallas says:

      It goes to show there is no minimum threshold to do what’s right.

      However , I agree it gets more attention than it deserves.
      The reason is because it’s the obvious and logical thing to do. In fact it’s so obvious that the majority of sheeple get it. In your case, the lunatic fringe will never get it.

      • pedro says:

        In your effe’d up world, looking after the well being of unicorns is the right thing to do

      • bracketcreep says:

        Why you’ve made such a cynical strategy a tenet of your religion is something I totally get.

  19. Tiberius says:

    Banking businesses seem to dominate that graphic by far – why is that?