Bribery Versus Financial Endorsement: Is there a grey area?

So….I recently have been reading a lot about how NOM and the AFA are slamming the “homosexual agenda” for bribing Gov. Cuomo into signing the same sex marriage bill in new york and I gotta be honest, I’m so sick of hearing that word. In my mind, despite Endorsement being a fairly corruptable idea and is often used that way, Bribery is a matter of legality and Endorsement CAN in fact be used responsibly.

to approve, support, or sustain: to endorse a political candidate.

money or any other valuable consideration given or promised with a view to corrupting the behavior of a person, especially in that person’s performance as an athlete, public official, etc.: The motorist offered the arresting officer a bribe to let him go.

Now, it’s debatable sure, but basically bribery deals specifically with corruption, and Endorsement CAN deal with it, but doesn’t necessarily have to.

I.e., if a Homosexual couple bribed a state Judge to pass them a Marriage certificate and fudge the paperwork, this is wrong. But if that same couple financially endorsed that judge in hopes that he would vote for same-sex marriage bills in the future, it’s a lot more of a sound reasoning for doing so. But, if it’s basically a matter of coercion, persuasion or force, where does the line draw? Can there be a grey area, or are both equally morally right/wrong?

I figure this might be an interesting topic, so I’d love to hear your thoughts.