You can't trust a meta-ethical moral relativist since such a person can abuse reason to justify any act.
OP is like rain on your wedding day.
I've made a huge mistake.
You can't trust a meta-ethical moral relativist since such a person can abuse reason to justify any act.
While I'm for Gay marriage I actually agree. If the founders want to pursue some political ambitions they can do so via other private charities or separate vehicles. Not through Google. It shouldn't be any business of a public company as powerful as Google to try and tell the public what they should think.
That which comes into existence will eventually break apart and pass away
Last edited by Elimentals; 16-07-2012 at 10:31 AM.
.... and thanks for all the fish.
Appreciated. And that's noble. But it's dangerous. If Google starts assembling the political apparatus to influence large scale public opinion and maybe law creation it could backfire one day. Imagine for a moment the reverse happens. Suppose in 10 years time Fox somehow manages to buy a controlling share of Google. Sure it sounds unlikely now but the ANC took control of South Africa and that sounded just as unlikely 10 years before 1994.
Now what do you think Fox would do(or some conservative company like it, or, shudder, a government agency) with a company like Google who developed an internal, integrated political activism system?
I know, I know, 'ol Geriatrix is going on a paranoid rant here, but I'd rather Google keep on doing search and email and not dabble in politics.
That which comes into existence will eventually break apart and pass away
Surely if Google has this agenda, then what about conservative Christians who work there? Are their rights not been infringed upon?
Bookmarks