29 comments

• 

  Richard

  1 year ago

  OK so I think it is great that Google believes this. I like them more for it.
  
  I do like that they are willing to do this, it's something a bit quirky and I sorta think about Google that way but I hope that they don't get overly political as I don't think that a search or advertising company should be strongly promoting either side of an argument outside those that directly affect their business such as Net neutrality.
  
  But I do think this is pretty cool. I mean come on it's not like there showing a pic of two guys getting it on on the homepage.
  reply
• 

  snipergirl

  1 year ago

  I find it interesting that wolfsbayne and others are always going on about the "queer agenda" as if "the gays" are some sort of paramilitary organisation.
  
  He wishes. Wolfsbayne, you're clearly hoping they turn up at your doorstep and get you laid, rarrrr. Nice manly name by the way- it's the perfect cover for your secret closet identity.
  
  Oh- and please do some historical research before you post on society and how universally against homosexuality it's always been. I suggest you have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berdache for some information on exactly how accepted homosexual behaviour was in the Americas in the past and for a little more military wank-material for you there's always http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_t...
  reply
• 

  brooksbayne

  1 year ago

  i'm talking about anyone trying to negate standard "accepted" values. not queers specifically. largely, it's the whole of the secular progressives that push the queer agenda. your examples don't follow since they don't have anything to do with America, the nation. the american indians were deemed savages by almost every white person back then so they weren't really looked at as role models. and the ancient greeks weren't known for their morality either. bottom line, there are more ppl against homosexuality in this country than are for it, and that's just something you'll have to get used to. as much as you hate that fact, the majority doesn't like the gay agenda.
  reply
• 

  snipergirl

  1 year ago

  So Canada, the UK (where your esteemed culture is originally from), Spain, New Zealand, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Finland, various US states, parts of Australia, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Germany, Czech Republic, Hungary, South Africa, Switzerland, Uruguay, Slovenia, Luxembourg, Switzerland have all legalised same sex unions.
  
  Sorry dude, you're losing this one ;).
  
  Oh and thanks for posting your last 2 comments- you've proved the point about your own stupidity which I think Duncan was actually trying to give you the benefit of the doubt about by removing. Nothing like a particularly stupid person from the so-called "religious right" making their case even more pig-headed and retarded.
  
  *claps*
  reply
• 

  brooksbayne

  1 year ago

  again with the non-sequiturs? this is america we're talking about. we're not talking about any of the countries mentioned. but i think it's funny you threw in countries like luxembourg, as if that was your big "gotcha". i think you're inferring things that aren't stated in my posts. you can call me names all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that the majority of americans are against the queer agenda. for the record, i'm not part of the religious right. don't assume that only the religious right isn't supportive of the queer agenda.
  
  i don't have to agree with you. this is called disagreement. your secular progressive views may cause you to think anyone without your views is stupid, but i assure you, we're not. we're the majority in america and we still have the strongest and most innovative country in the history of the planet. do any of you secular progressives ever wonder why that is?
  
  if you don't like america, don't live here or visit here. maybe you should all consider helping build up the empire of luxembourg.
  reply
• 

  The queer agenda

  7 months ago

  Yes there were know for morality. They invented it. See: Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics just for an example. Victory by superior knowledge.
  reply
• 

  Joanmarie

  1 year ago

  I'm somewhat torn on this one. On the one hand, I happen to support gay rights and I'm impressed that Google had the courage to take such a public stance on what is sadly a controversial topic. On the other hand, if I did a search and Google displayed symbols of something I wholeheartedly was opposed to, I'd be miffed. So.... As much as I agree with the position, I kind of wish they chose other ways to express it: Lobbying for legislation, sponsoring educational initiatives, donating to organizations that support gay rights, etc., etc. Things like that can make a tangible difference; irking the other side, less of one. *shrugs*
  reply
• 

  drewolanoff

  1 year ago

  I don't think people who have issues with the LGBT community are googling "gay" anyways :)
  reply
• 

  Duncan Riley

  1 year ago

  Drew
  true, but when has that ever stopped the far right from getting worked up about stuff like this? :-) I think it's great Google is doing this, but it has a touch of the crazy brave about it in terms of the issues that may arise in the right wing media and blogosphere
  reply
• 

  drewolanoff

  1 year ago

  Good point. I'm hearing "keep our search result pages clean" and I think i would error on that side.
  
  Bold yes. But for a small company maybe, when you talk about a publicly traded one, then it gets tough.
  
  I guess it would be the same as if Apple did a Rainbow edition iPod.
  reply
• 

  snipergirl

  1 year ago

  I keep thinking that I really love their "we'll do what we like thanks" attitude... but being disappointed that they don't actually apply that philosophy to other areas of their business practice- like say censoring search results in China.
  
  I guess there are far less people in the religious right than there are in China. (sorry Wolfsbane but you really ARE in the minority as far as the western world is concerned. We're mostly secular, have a low birth rate and don't have neurosyphilis)
  
  So I guess I'm kinda cynical on this one in a way...
  
  ... but hell it's still fucking awesome regardless
  reply
• 

  Rahsheen

  1 year ago

  Well, if this "Religious Right" you speak of intersects with that other group that thinks Google IS the Internet, I don't think Google has much to worry about.
  reply
• 

  ecook

  1 year ago

  You don't necessarily have to be part of the "religious right" to be insulted by something like this. I hate having this garbage shoved down my throat, and I certainly am not part of the "religious right". The most ironic part of this article being the overt display of your own bias and ignorance by condescendingly referring to the "religious right". It always strikes me as odd when individuals who claim themselves to be the most liberal and open minded, are quite often the individuals that espouse the most vitriol and ignorance.
  
  If you don't like their closed mindedness...I implore you to not share the very attribute you are railing against. I don't need my search engine to try to dictate to me what my social conscience should be comprised of.
  reply
• 

  brooksbayne

  1 year ago

  agreed.
  reply
• 

  tehKenny

  11 months ago

  Actually, yes you do.
  reply
• 

  ecook

  11 months ago

  Really?! I guess since tehKenny says it is so, it is so.
  
  Dipshit.
  reply
• 

  Trench

  1 year ago

  It doesn't come up when you type in Google is gay.
  reply
• 

  Mark

  1 year ago

  i think it's really cool they did this--major props.
  reply
• 

  Lee

  1 year ago

  This is no different than Google putting up holiday logos, like they do at Christmas. June is Pride Month.
  
  I don't celebrate all the holidays that they put icons up for, btu I also don't get angry about it.
  
  Inquisitr writer, I don't completely agree with the way you framed this story. It's not *necessarily* a political statement that they support gay rights or any other agenda. It's just an acknowledgment of a holiday that millions of people worldwide celebrate.
  reply
• 

  AnnR

  1 year ago

  I agree with Lee. This is Gay Pride Month and I think Google wanted to acknowledge this which I appreciate. I also appreciate the many images on Google's home page which indicate support for many other holidays, events, etc. Drewolanoff was correct in saying you'll most likely see the flag when you type in "gay" so I'd be curious as to why the "religious right" (I don't happen to believe they're one giant organism but many individuals, some with surprisingly progressive views on social issues) would be searching en mass for the word "gay." hmmm... Anyway, this article almost seems to be a call to arms for the meanies in society. It sounds alarmist.
  reply
• 

  paulmwatson

  1 year ago

  Looks simply to be a good way of highlighting the ads on the right to me.
  reply
• 

  Adam_Y

  1 year ago

  Surely the religious right don't need google searches... everything they need to know is in the bible...
  
  I might start printing bibles with a rainbow spine.
  reply
• 

  brooksbayne

  1 year ago

  lol, i got blocked by duncan on friendfeed for not agreeing with what google is doing.
  
  my comments again that got me blocked by duncan on friendfeed:
  
  the queer agenda is nothing more than modern secular progressive attempts to normalize something that was always unacceptable in america - beyond the closet, that is. newsflash: not everyone agrees on this issue. and those that are against the queer agenda aren't all idots. we just disagree with it, fundamentally. i'd like to think we're entitled to disagree with that agenda here in this free land, especially considering we're in the majority. no vitriol here, just statements.
  reply
• 

  Dubi L

  1 year ago

  You can believe what you want, as long as you don't limit the rights of gays to do whatever they want.
  reply
• 

  brooksbayne

  1 year ago

  lol, that's not how it works here in america. see all of the above for context. it's not me, it's the history and majority of america that says so - replete with constitutional amendments and such. you don't have to like it, but that's just how it is. gays can't do "whatever they want" in america. they are very much limited here. not opinion...fact. maybe you should try luxembourg, i hear they are a queer bastion.
  reply
• 

  snipergirl

  1 year ago

  How come homosexuality is mostly legal and several of your states even have gay marriage and civil unions then? Seems like it's getting easier to be gay in America by leaps and bounds quite contrary to all of your posts about just how much America "hates the gays"
  
  There's a hint hidden in here Wolfsbayne- it's "you can come out of the closet and take it up the ass too!"
  
  Don't be shy now...
  reply
• 

  brooksbayne

  1 year ago

  Ooo trollin' for colon? You're kinda classy...or not.
  
  Queer marriage is mostly *not* legal here in the U.S., contrary to your foreign misunderstanding. 41 states now have language defining marriage as between a man and a woman and 27 now have constitutional amendments defining marriage as such. A few more states have current ballot initiatives that will define marriage as between a man and a woman per their respective constitutions.
  
  Nearly all of these states passed these resolutions since 1996. Prior to 1996, only 3 states felt they had to define marriage because back then people just inherently understood what marriage has always been here - between what? Oh yeah, a man and a woman.
  
  The problem you and other secular progressives have with America is the worldview that goes along with 200+ years of judeo-christian morals. America is still "under God" in the minds of most of my fellow Americans, or they just don't like supporting queer marriage, or both.
  
  Your comments simply don't follow the facts. Since you revert to name calling, and your statements use weak substance, this doesn't surprise me.
  
  Arguing against an American with knowledge AND understanding (context is everything ain't it) of American law, history and traditions probably isn't your strong suit. Maybe you're used to dealing with Canadians pretending to be Americans. They always want to be like us. Who can blame them? Just kidding my Canadian friends, or am I?
  
  Next please...
  reply
• 

  snipergirl

  1 year ago

  let me put my earlier post in a form that you are less likely to misinterpret due to an inability to read:
  
  how come:
  1) homosexual behaviour has been legalised in most states in america since the 70's
  2) gay marriage and civil unions are present in several of your states
  if america is so devoutly anti-gay/queer/whatever as you claim?
  
  surely if that were the case wouldn't they be outlawing homosexual relationships rather than the opposite? surely you wouldn't have a democratic nominee who is pro gay rights? surely the federal bill to ban gay marriage would have passed?
  
  in fact, SURELY, you wouldn't have a wide variety of opinions about the whole issue represented throughout various areas and states in america! Like, say the fairly liberal north-east, california and other fairly educated areas of the US.
  
  also:
  how come:
  1) you refer to native americans as savages
  2) ignore the fact that american/judeo-christian culture has its roots in Europe, in particular in the UK
  3) also conveniently ignore the fairly benign history that christianity had with homosexuality before St Thomas Aquinas
  4) seem to pick and choose your american history to prove your point while ignoring the flagrantly obvious points which discount your ideas and prejudices
  5) lump all non-straight activists under the same label when they often are campaigning for a different set of rights- i bet you don't even realise that some gay/queer activists are against gay marriage, do you?
  6) persist in making an ass of yourself by completely misinterpreting context, wording and the finer points of debating
  7) have such a stubbornly US-centric view when most of the (even WASP) world lives outside the US
  if you are not in fact an uneducated, history-ignoring, backwards, incapable of logic, bigoted hick who has let himself be provoked into revealing himself as exactly the kind of person who the religious US right is stereotyped to be, within the US and outside it.
  
  Let me repeat that: you have shown yourself to be an ignorant, bigoted stupid hick to the world. And you walked straight into that trap. Congratulations for furthering your cause!!
  
  NEXT!
  reply
• 

  brooksbayne

  1 year ago

  lol. nice ad hominems...not really. i'm thinkin you're giving yourself way too much credit for thinking you know things. but on this issue, you really don't know that you don't know.
  
  so, you're not american and you don't know our history or laws as well as you think you do. i know history even that which occurred outside this country, but we're talking about america and i'll keep bringing us back if you keep straying from point.
  
  we're not talking about stringing up queers. so homo behavior isn't being debated. well, you keep doing it for some reason. i'm pointing out that americans are not ready for queer marriage and may never be. nothing you state is supported by the facts regarding queer marriage in america. 41 states codified the definition as between a man a woman. 27 states, with 3 more on the way, have inserted the definition of marriage as one man and one woman into their respective constitutions. and all that state movement occurred since 1996.
  
  here's the beauty of debating someone who doesn't know american law:
  the feds did pass a ban on queer marriage regardless of whether or not you were aware of it! lol. it happened in 1996.
  
  btw, even if obama likes parts of the queer agenda, he's *against* gay marriage and has stated that many times.
  
  quick clarification since you don't know context as well as you think you do. you mentioned something about indians as being an influence on our view of queers here in america. i pointed out that assertion was invalid because ppl back then considered them savages, not me. reread that section if you need to.
  
  i don't know why you're obsessed with europe to the point that you keep getting sidetracked from our america conversation. the uk has nothing to do with us on this issue. here's why...those early americans left england because the retarded (and probably queer) king distorted the christian doctrine. ppl didn't like it and they came here to get away from the bastard and the crappy (at the time) church of england. plenty of history books on the subject. maybe you didn't get one of those versions but instead got a redacted uk version at whichever uk influenced school you attended.
  
  aquinas? cmon now, let's stay focused. i'm not here to debate the entire christian history and how some periods may have been affected by the karesh's of their day. i've been talking about the american view on queer marriage. your eu and uk points are just irrelevant. please stay on topic.
  
  please present the parts of american history i ignored that pertains to queer marriage. there really hasn't been ANY movement in this area until the last 20 years or so. i have provided the reasons why queer marriage isn't gonna happen here. i'm here giving you the insight as to why america is the way she is and you're ignoring that to attack me. if you take a step back and read both blogs' comments you'll see that i'm trying to educate ppl who don't understand. sure i can be cheeky, but i try to amuse myself without getting too tastless or disrespectful.
  
  don't let your bias cause you to miss what i'm trying to say, which is basically this, if ppl push the queer agenda too hard and too fast they are gonna get shut down - not by a few bunker dwelling right-wing loonies, but rather the majority. and the effect of the shutdown is likely a constitutional amendment in every state that may never be repealed. mess with the "moral" majority in america at your own peril.
  
  i won't respond to the rest since it was mostly irrelevant, factless and bordering on a tirade. maybe tone down the rhetoric and stick to actual facts that are relevant to the topic. you might believe you're the most enlightened intellectual to ever walk the secular progressive walk, but you're not gonna win any converts engaging ppl in that manner. i am part of the majority in america. i don't need your side's approval on this issue - you need my side's. if you don't want the majority's approval, then be prepared for the status quo, or maybe even worse, a backlash, if you push with too much vitriol.
  reply