A post by Maynard
Pacific Gas and Electric, a California utility, has donated $250,000 to the campaign to defeat Proposition 8 on the California November ballot. The state of California compels us to buy from this company if we’re in their distrct.
Setting aside the especial controversy surrounding gay marriage, it’s just wrong for a regulated monopoly to be politically active. If businesses insist upon dragging their politics into their commerce, then I should be allowed the leeway to vote with my feet and choose another supplier. A monopoly of a vital resource has no business throwing its
Here’s the news report.
Yeah, there’s a political philosophy where this type of corporate action is advocated. It’s called Fascism, and its shit.
Interesting word, that Fascism. This type of political behavior has occured on both the left (socialist rule) and the right (theocratic rule.) In this case there is unity of action by agreement or coercion between powerful rulers in California state government and their subjects, the ruled at PG&E.
Money, our votes for the services of the utility, is corrupted towards voting for expansion of government benefit entitlements, which in turn serves as a magnet to get people to join the newly entitled group. Under a regime where homosexual or even non sexual unions have protections and privileges equal to those of married couples, married couples must are then exposed to more economic competition. This reduces the odds of success for the married couple where success is measured in terms of the durability of the marriage and the number of healthy children that the couple would naturally bring into the world. Those demanding this type of equality disrespect and denegrate the foundation of a healthy society. The primary effect of this type of institutionalized disrespect is the victimization of children who are the most vulnerable group of people in any society. The weakening of marriage as an elevated and special institution increases the odds that children will be exposed to fractured, fragmented and unstable guidance in their upbringing and to role model confusion.
Or course if we just follow the Soviet model they had it all worked out. The rise of the Nanny States of America will most certainly “CHANGE” everything. In it we’ll have unity at last.
You’ve cited the “Thought Police” and each time I’ve thought of Gay Pharisees. Here’s one for you. http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/politics/2008/view/2008_08_16_Gay-group_founder_slapped_over_McCain/srvc=home&position=0
I’m not sure, but I think it was Crutchley’s money that got this off the ground in the first place.
I’m sure PG&E has donated lots of money to political causes.
Shawmut: I read that Herald article. I think it’s funny that the guy was asked to step down from his job based on a contribution to McCain. I’m sure if someone was fired for contributing to Obama every civil rights lawyer in the country would be screaming.
Right, Bstndance:
There would demonstarations at the State House, a drama procession, people wearing sandwichboards designed as checks with blood on them. And there’d be a $500 plate dinner to buy their “Stonewall Moment” fundraiser sponsored by the real estate aunties. We’d be witnessing a pumped up parade to take in every gay grievance such as the military, voting rights for non citizens who are socio-politico-cultural-refugees.
A further investigation would find that Crutchley once donated to a church and his grandmother had kroegerrands in her pin-money.
Would you folks have your nickers in a twist this much if they were Pro-8? I don’t think ANY state-granted monopoly should be giving to ANY political campaign, no matter the cause or which side they are on/
Good Point, FG,
It is a point that should be amplified. As you may note, I came tangent to the extreme opposite of the case. Sometimes a faction (either side of the issue) can be embarassed by its supporters alone.
In the Northeast, we’ve been ruled by the outrageously arrogant Left, that the PC Police don’t even cite our rights.
Remember, if moderation is missing from the revolution….
Well, we can all read history.
Public utilities should not be allowed to contribute to any political cause that has no impact on it.
Marriages are created in a house of worship, before god.
We are supposed to maintain a separation between government and religion.
Therefore I assert that all civil “marriages” should be considered to be civil unions.
Marriage should not appear anywhere on the civil union contract, or licence.
Religious organizations can have their own rules (like Catholics) regarding marriages, annulments, and divorce, and this can be totally outside the government.
This way, anyone can create a civil partnership, or a joint tennancy contract, and no church (being a separate, private organization) need be compelled to recognize it.