70 major corporations tell the Supreme Court: Strike down DOMA now!

[grantcart]

In addition to looking at Proposition 8 the Supreme Court is also hearing a challenge on DOMA.

Interestingly corporate America has spoken with a clear voice saying that DOMA is unfair and is going to cost them money because they are going to have to hire and treat employees with two different sets of benefits.


http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/70-major-corporations-file-amicus-brief-seeking-overturning-of-doma/

Our enterprises are located in states, including the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, that recognize the marriages of our employees and colleagues to same-sex spouses. At the same time, we are subject to the federal Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), which precludes federal recognition of these marriages.

This dual regime uniquely burdens amici. It puts us, as employers and enterprises, to unnecessary cost and administrative complexity, and regardless of our business or professional judgment forces us to discriminate against a class of our lawfully-married employees, upon whose welfare and morale our own success in part depends.
. . .

Also quotes a blogger listing some of the Corporations

Which companies are protesting DOMA, you ask? Starbucks. Google. Microsoft. Levi’s. Nike. Time Warner Cable. Aetna. New Balance. Xerox. The list is impressive indeed, especially given how it’s more or less an addendum to a much longer list, one that includes all the other enormous U.S. companies who already openly support gay rights, like Apple and Disney and Pixar, like Hershey and Coca-Cola and Dell, American Express and Mattel and even big media daddies like Time Warner, Inc. and Viacom. Et al.

[patrice]

1. KICK

[Initech]

2. About damn time!!!!

[L0oniX]

3. Nothing corporations do can redeem their souls from the pits of hell. n/t

[bigtree]

4. voting with our dollars

. . . one of the most effective ways to reach out and touch the legislators tied to the big money from corps. Good to see these companies stepping forward.

[FarCenter]

5. Providing benefits to homosexual couples is cheaper than heterosexual couples

The latter tend to have more expensive dependents.

[bullwinkle428]

6. More proof that "the business of America is business", but really,

"any port in a storm" applies if the end result is satisfying.