Google began showing off an interesting new element in their employee policies. They have started a new policy to give money to compensate the extra taxes for domestic partnerships for gay relationships.
The thought behind this is that straight people can get a tax break if they get married, but homosexuals do not have this opportunity, so Google helps give it to them.
I am the one of the least anti gay people here I think, but this is taking a bit over the edge and walking directly into a problem. i can hear the cries already.
I can appreciate that Google is wanting to help, and that the intentions are good, high five for that, but how can you possibly think that selecting one group of people to receive new company benefits ignoring it for another is going to work?
This takes away the entire financial benefit of getting married. The idea for tax benefits for getting married is a perk that is used as an incentive to get married. Blatantly giving it to people removes that incentive so what is the point?
This is on the verge of hetro-phobia. This is making a monster of an assumption that all gay relationships are willing to get married. They are giving this benefit to all gay employees whether they are in a committed relationship or not. All they have to say is that they are and they have it in the bank.
Once again, great idea, but how are you going to justify saying, "okay, you are straight and not married yet so…no compensation. Okay next…Okay your gay…not married yet..but you will be so you get compensation." There is no possible way they can legally justify this.
The pro gay movement is all about making the gay movement seem normal, and making it seem like something that will never get special treatment, just equal treatment. This idea that Google is trying though is technically helping, it is only hindering the process.
I seriously have no idea how they are getting around this without red flags calling discrimination based on sexual orientation about this.
This is going to be nothing but problems for Google. Nothing but problems.
For links to other articles I've written
http://rlwoodsiii.blogspot.com/For the original article about it
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/0...