Saying No to Prop 8 is Cool

This brilliant ad was ironically released just at the same time that Apple publicly endorsed and contributed to the funding of the No on 8 campaign:

“Apple was among the first California companies to offer equal rights and benefits to our employees’ same-sex partners, and we strongly believe that a person’s fundamental rights — including the right to marry — should not be affected by their sexual orientation.”

“Apple views this as a civil rights issue, rather than just a political issue, and is therefore speaking out publicly against Proposition 8.”

Vote to retain marriage equality, California. Vote NO on Prop 8!


5 responses to “Saying No to Prop 8 is Cool


    I like the ad too, but WHY WHY did it take them so long to get a GOOD ad out?

    I personally think that all those gay celebs should have been on call to make a ad.

    I mean don’t they care about the impact of this proposition?

    It’s good that No on 8 has finally gotten their act together.

    P.S I will be voting No on 8 . 😀

  2. I sincerely hope PROP 8 fails miserably. BUT – if it DOES passes, is everyone prepared to spend another ba-zillion dollars on PR and possibly wait 20-30 years to “win” equality?

    AND – if it does NOT pass, which state will we focus on next so we can spend another ba-zillion dollars to purchase civil rights?

    I know I am virtually alone here (except for Charles Merrill and his partner), but I think all of you are insane. Truly crazy….one step away from writing on the wall with your feces crazy.

    Because if ALL of us truly believed we WERE equal, we would not be so patient as tax-payers and U.S. citizens. We’d simply KNOW we ARE equal, and refuse to pay into a system that not only denies

    our familes civil marriage but doesn’t even acknowledge

    our existence (wait for the 2010 census).

    I’m 43, and I will NOT wait until I’m 73 for fair and equal treatment. It’s OK for the country at large to be
    ignorant, bigoted, mid-guided, and mid-informed. But that’s not
    my fault. So until people GROW UP and show my family the same “civil” respect heterosexually-identified families are given, I owe this country and the IRS nothing.

    How many times do I need to say this?


  3. A valid moral point John, but is it the most practical in terms of protest? The state has absolute power when it comes to taxation legislation and enforcement – there’s no general consensus either in any protest movement that taxation is any longer an effective medium with which to protest civil rights. Once maybe, but no protest movement stays static – if the reverse were true civil society would look like the 60s and maybe it should…

    What I don’t get is why people are not relentlessly in the streets protesting this (are they? Is even the internet not reflecting this?), why there appears to be so much complacency. It’s almost as if there’s this belief that California is destined to reject Prop 8, which is bananas. As a US citizen if I had an American same-sex marriage (I have a British one, which isn’t recognised by the federal govt) which the voters threatened to take away from me, I would be as visible, vocal and organised as possible to stop it. Just getting married and hoping for the best isn’t enough folks.

  4. Not paying your taxes to protest is a ridiculous criminal offense that rises to the, “Crazy Crank” level. All it does is tell the population at large that your greedy AND stupid. Name one tax protestor that accomplished anything except jail time.
    If you want to make a difference speak out, donate to one of the groups protesting, or make a personal effort to speak to california voters. Not paying your taxes puts money in your pocket, not theirs. Ads may not be the best way but it’s one of the few we have.
    I too worry that this might result in backlash, but better to say something than not. Let people know that their friends and neighbors believe in gay marriage.

  5. In a word – bull. I refuse to “pay” for a civil right. And “voting” on that right is INSANITY.

    This fight is going to the Supreme Court, with more prominent figures like Charles Merrill leading the way; he has filed papers with the U.S. Tax Court objecting to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) based on the 1st Amendment Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. He objects to not getting all the same benefits as other married couples — 1,138 of them — under a discriminatory tax code.

    Go ahead and spend your hard-earned money on civil rights – you have that luxury. Some of us who have been harmed by this legal injustice simply cannot continue sanctioning the federal government’s discrimination against my family.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s