brendan-eich-mozilla-firefox-square

Mozilla

Media


Brendan Eich, the well-known techie who has gotten swept up in a controversy about his support of California’s anti-gay marriage law Proposition 8, is resigning as CEO of for-profit Mozilla Corporation and also from the board of the nonprofit foundation which wholly owns it.

Mozilla confirmed the change in a blog post.

“Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it. We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it’s because we haven’t stayed true to ourselves,” read the post, in part. “We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry. We must do better.”

In several interviews this week, Eich had insisted that he would not step down from the job he was only recently appointed to, due to the intense backlash over a $1,000 donation he made in 2008 in support of the ballot measure to ban gay marriage.

“So I don’t want to talk about my personal beliefs because I kept them out of Mozilla all these 15 years we’ve been going,” he said to the Guardian, for example, yesterday. “I don’t believe they’re relevant.”

Not so, of course. In an interview this morning, Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker said that Eich’s ability to lead the company that makes the Firefox Web browser had been badly damaged by the continued scrutiny over the hot-button issue, which had actually been known since 2012 inside the Mozilla community.

“It’s clear that Brendan cannot lead Mozilla in this setting,” said Baker, who added that she would not and could not speak for Eich. “The ability to lead — particularly for the CEO — is fundamental to the role and that is not possible here.”

She said that Eich — who created the JavaScript programming language, among other prominent computing achievements — had not been forced to resign by her or others on its board, which includes prominent Silicon Valley entrepreneur and investor Reid Hoffman.

“I think there has been pressure from all sides, of course, but this is Brendan’s decision,” Baker said. “Given the circumstances, this is not surprising.”

Indeed, those circumstances included vocal protests on Twitter by Mozilla staffers and a call by the OkCupid dating site to not use Firefox.

The controversy has been a difficult one for Mozilla, which could be described as more of a movement than a tech company and which has a very vocal community around it.

It has also resulted in scrutiny of its governance, in which Baker and also Eich — who have worked together for 15 years since founding Mozilla on deeply held beliefs over the development of an open Internet — played a big part.

In addition, three of Mozilla Corporation’s board members — former Mozilla CEO and current Greylock Partners VC John Lilly, former Mozilla CEO Gary Kovacs and well-known tech exec Ellen Siminoff — have recently resigned.

But each of their departures seems to have been only tangentially related to Eich’s appointment — though none of them supported his selection as CEO, according to numerous sources, for other reasons — and not to the controversy over Prop 8.

Baker said that she had not known about Eich’s views on gay marriage throughout most of their working relationship, until the donation came to light last year.

“That was shocking to me, because I never saw any kind of behavior or attitude from him that was not in line with Mozilla’s values of inclusiveness,” she said, noting that there was a long and public community process about what to do about it in which Eich, then CTO, participated. “But I overestimated that experience.”

Baker — who became emotional at one point during the interview — noted that she was “doing a fair amount of self-reflection and I am wondering how did I miss it that this would matter more when he was the CEO.”

Preserving Mozilla’s integrity was paramount, she said, especially since “we are heading into a period of global mass surveillance and the role of those fighting against will be more important than ever.”

She added: “This is hard since Brendan is a founder and has contributed so much here. But making sure others continue to join and support Mozilla’s efforts is even more important.”

Baker said there was not another leading candidate for the CEO role as yet, although Mozilla had been conducting an extensive search using Spencer Stuart before the Eich selection, which also included another internal candidate, Jay Sullivan.

“There are certainly very talented people we have talked to, so we are not at ground zero by any means,” she said. “But we are now in the middle of what is clearly a crisis, and this had to happen.”

A crisis indeed, not helped much by a series of Eich interviews this week, in which he declined to apologize and used what can only be described as pretzel logic about how a clearly tolerant community like Mozilla should also support what many now consider intolerant beliefs.

Eich told the Guardian, for example: “So far we’ve been able to bring people together of diverse beliefs including on things like marriage equality. We couldn’t have done this, we couldn’t have done Firefox One. I would’ve been excluded, someone else would’ve been excluded because of me — I wouldn’t have done that personally, they’d have just left. So imagine a world without Firefox: not good.”

He also dragged in a truly bizarre point about people in Indonesia not liking gays marrying to justify his continued leadership. He noted to the newspaper that LGBT marriage was “not considered universal human rights yet, and maybe they will be, but that’s in the future, right now we’re in a world where we have to be global to have effect.”

(Hey Brendan, does that mean we need to just say bygones about some of the virulent anti-women sentiments and laws in some countries, since it’s a Firefox world after all? No, I did not think so.)

“I think I’m the best person for the job and I’m doing the job,” Eich insisted to the Guardian.

Throughout the interviews, it was not hard to get the sense that Eich really wanted to stick strongly by his views about gay marriage, which run counter to much of the tech industry and, increasingly, the general population in the U.S. For example, he repeatedly declined to answer when asked if he would donate to a similar initiative today.

Instead, he tried to unsuccessfully hedge those sentiments and, perhaps more importantly, did not seem to understand that he might have to pay the inevitable price for having them.

Thus, something had to give — and it did.

When asked about worries that the continuing controversy about Eich would have had broader impact, such as negotiations to renew a longtime lucrative contract with Google — which has been a high-profile supporter of gay rights — Baker said that while making this move aligned with that, it was not a factor in Eich’s departure.

“This is more important than business relationships,” she said.

Here is the full Mozilla blog post on the Eich departure:

Brendan Eich Steps Down as Mozilla CEO

Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it. We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it’s because we haven’t stayed true to ourselves.

We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry. We must do better.

Brendan Eich has chosen to step down from his role as CEO. He’s made this decision for Mozilla and our community.

Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.

Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all.

We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public. This is meant to distinguish Mozilla from most organizations and hold us to a higher standard. But this time we failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community.

While painful, the events of the last week show exactly why we need the web. So all of us can engage freely in the tough conversations we need to make the world better.

We need to put our focus back on protecting that Web. And doing so in a way that will make you proud to support Mozilla.

What’s next for Mozilla’s leadership is still being discussed. We want to be open about where we are in deciding the future of the organization and will have more information next week. However, our mission will always be to make the Web more open so that humanity is stronger, more inclusive and more just: that’s what it means to protect the open Web.

We will emerge from this with a renewed understanding and humility — our large, global, and diverse community is what makes Mozilla special, and what will help us fulfill our mission. We are stronger with you involved.

Thank you for sticking with us.



163 comments
pvd
pvd

Hi Ms. Swisher!

Hello everyone else!


Today i want to tell you a story.


Many many years ago I was working for a large company as an trainee in their IT department. This was in the 90s and i was a teenager back then.

As this company can be described as right wing/conservative it wasn't suprising that I was the only "out of the closet" gay person working there. One day my boss told me that (and no I'm not kidding you here) the BOARD OF DIRECTORS was discussing my sexual orientation and wether it could damage the reputation and image of the company. And he then told me that I should think about wether this was a good place for "someone like me". Long story short I ultimately left the company.


Well, that is a story out of my life that came to my mind when I read this article. And in a way, on a smaler scale, it mirrors what happend to Mr. Eich.


One important basic question is: Do we have to tolerate intolerance?


I also think that it is important to differentiate between someone's opinion on a subject and actively supporting a extraordinary hateful campaign like pro-prop 8. If someone wants to see the tv-ads again: http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/04/04/brendan_eich_supported_prop_8_which_was_worse_than_you_remember.html


Yes Mr. Eich is now being stigmatised, and will remain stigmatised for a long time.

With his views, that are not considered "politically correct" by people around him, he now finds himself in the position of being part of and representing an (un- or less accepted) minority.


And I really wish him and his family all the best for the future. I hope that he won't be a victim of discrimination in the future and that he himself doesn't discriminate others.


pvd

geb910
geb910

Isn't this REVERSE DISCRIMMINATION?    People are entitled to their own opinions and freedom of speech.   Just because the majority of the world today backs gay marriage that doesn't make the rest of us wrong.

Dennis Paine
Dennis Paine

Mea culpa:  "respectfully" suggest .. .


DP

Dennis Paine
Dennis Paine

Dear Ms. Swisher,


Your description of a successful initiative -- The Defense of Marriage Act -- as California’s 'anti-gay marriage law' Proposition 8 belies your own bias.  And your Orwellian spin on a 'tolerant' community like Mozilla and (Eich's) 'intolerant' beliefs is particularly chilling.


I have been a fan of your -- and Walt Mossberg's -- writing for years and this current article came as a complete shock.  May I respectively suggest that you examine your former WSJ colleague James Taranto's column on Brendan Eich: 


http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303987004579481502667817472


JT's analysis is thoughtful, thorough and compassionate . . . an example of professionalism worth noting. 

oxo
oxo

Eich's donation has been known about for years. If OKCupid was so concerned about Eich, why didn't they make a statement earlier - why wait until after the issue becomes a major public controversy to pull their publicity stunt. They didn't even make a statement after he was appointed to CEO.


And now they're congratulating themselves for educating us all..


We are pleased that OkCupid’s boycott has brought tremendous awareness to the critical matter of equal rights for all partnerships.


Firstly they didn't boycott anything - why are they lying about that? - and secondly the 'awareness' they brought has had the effect of making the gay community look vindictive and fascistic. They've taken what has been a very positive movement and made it negative.


One of the weirdest aspects of this whole episode is that it's been driven primarily by a bunch of straight people taking offense on the behalf of gay people. And now it's gay people who are going WHOA that's not what we wanted!


Some of the most sympathetic defenses of Eich are coming from homosexual writers who are critical of what's happened. 

MikeInMI
MikeInMI

It now appears as if the "inclusive" Mozilla community will exclude anyone who believes marriage is between a man and a woman.  How is that inclusive?


Are we also now saying that engaging in political discourse risks your job?  Or any future job may wish to apply for?  And that even if your position is very popular and would win more than 50% of the vote, it that later changes, you are out.


What about the value of diversity of opinions?


Are we now going to have workers voting on their CEO?


Regardless of your opinion on gay marriage, this decision should frighten you, and discourages political discussion.

johnbessa
johnbessa

 finally, we can get rid of JavaScript so we can have an HTML programming language :)

jawinner
jawinner

This whole thing has been a disgusting mess.  Eich seems to be a compassionate, talented guy who would have done well in that position.  He had successfully distanced his personal beliefs from his work for six years.  No one even knew he had those opinions until the LGBT community drug it up from the grave and paraded it around.  It just seems like a bunch of trouble for nothing.  Nothing was gained, people are angry on both sides, and Mozilla will suffer for it

@giovanni
@giovanni

Anyone else of any social, religious, or political system that disagrees with your employer... let this serve as a warning.  If this stands as an acceptable response to an individual's personal beliefs, we all deserve what we get. This is NOT an issue of marriage equality. This is not an anti-gay or anti-Christian issue. This is a question of freedom of political expression and the security to be safe with your own personal thoughts and beliefs. 


The twisted logic from Mozilla and the irresponsible, disgraceful way in which a handful of selfish Mozilla employees took this internal issue public is impossible to make sense of. How those people in anyway represent the openness and inclusion that the Mozilla Foundation created (and based on all accounts, Brendan Eich lived out in his official roles at Mozilla) is beyond me. 


I've used Netscape/Mozilla for well over 15 years, but it has been removed from all my machines. This whole situation is terrifying... 


After spending over a decade founding/running barcamps, devcamps, hackathons, etc. I hope in my heart of hearts that Mozilla never recovers from this. This is NOT what the open web is about. This is an absolute nightmare and Mozilla has now become the enemy we fight to defeat when it comes to supporting real tolerance, compassion, acceptance, and diversity...

Sev Bradley
Sev Bradley

"Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someones lifestyle, you must hate, or fear them. The second is the love someone means you agree with everything they believe, and do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise convictions to be compassionate."

AJ-0000
AJ-0000

I've uninstalled Firefox, and will never use anything associated with Mozilla again. The same goes for OK Cupid. The laws mandating public disclosure of political donations will clearly have to be rethought if this is the way things are going to be in this country in the future.

RogerWilli
RogerWilli

"... I don't think it's good for my integrity or Mozilla's integrity to be pressured into changing a position," Eich said. "If Mozilla became more exclusive and required more litmus tests, I think that would be a mistake that would lead to a much smaller Mozilla, a much more fragmented Mozilla...."

"... At another point, Eich said that attacks on his beliefs represented a threat to Mozilla's survival. "If Mozilla cannot continue to operate according to its principles of inclusiveness, where you can work on the mission no matter what your background or other beliefs, I think we'll probably fail," he said...."

I respectfully withdraw from Mozilla Firefox, and urge every Christian in the world, and indeed the entire population of the United States to so do.

Mitchell Baker's words will become a monument to the definition of hypocrisy ... and for that alone she loses the trust we have placed in her and Mozilla Firefox over the years.

NO more!

Kaffeguy
Kaffeguy

This scares me. I'm for gay rights, and for marriage of people of the same sex. It scares me that we have become the society we have become. The man was supporting his belief. So if you have a company that the majority of the people are Republicans and one member in a high position is a Democrat and has supported his party is he canned too. After this episode I have stopped using Firefox and am using only Chrome.  

daiku
daiku

This is very sad and wrong headed.  Over 50% of Californians voted against Gay Marriage.  Many of them hold this position based on religious beliefs.   I would suggest that very few would be opposed to civil uniions.  It seems ridiculous to me that a persons total worth to an organization is defined by 1 particular issue that has popular political support, but is not necessarily agreed on by all.   It is very sad that if a person doesn't share the view of the left, that they are not entitled to an opinion.  How quick people are to label others as bigots without any understanding of their position. And is there any example were his personal beliefs on this issue has been demonstrated to effect his job decision making?

 People are too quick to judge.  Of course, in California, all dissenting opinions are snuffed out by the left.  I guess this Is what Mozilla means be an inclusive culture.


The ultimate in arrogance and hypocrisy. 

Going In Sane
Going In Sane

Why is it assumed that believing that marriage is between 1 man and 1 woman an anti-gay position?  That is intellectually dishonest and just a straight up bullying tactic.  Same as labeling someone racist if their views do not match those of the activists that are trying to control the dialogue.


Do not deny that - you can't.  Even the "journalist" injects her own bias by calling it  "California's anti-gay marriage law Proposition 8" instead of just referring to it as Proposition 8 or the defense of marriage law Proposition 8.  


I do believe that anyone can marry.  But they cannot change the definition of marriage to suit their needs.  That is the real issue.  This is not about love.  This is not about pro/anti gay.  This is not about equality, as anyone can marry within the definition of marriage.  


A handful of people and groups are controlling the narrative.  Don't be fooled that because you may happen to agree with them that this is a good thing.  Wait until you are on the "wrong side" of the argument.  Then it won't be so pretty.  Imagine getting fired because of a comment that you make to a friend at a party.  Those drunk with power will not stop once they get this victory feather under their cap.   


Our discussions must be honest and direct, and not clouded with carefully crafted and phrases 



"Those who break down the dikes will themselves be drowned in the inundation." - Confucius

squiggleslash
squiggleslash

This is an excellent story and covers the fundamental issues - the expectations and respect due a CEO position vs other positions - extremely well, as well as Mozilla and Eich's fundamental mishandling of the situation.


I know many in the Tech Community have followed their jerking-knees on this issue, seeing a "censorship" issue rather than a "questioning whether someone's past actions make them qualified to lead" issue, but I'm glad for the eventual outcome, and hope over the coming months this will end up being a study in how not to handle a CEO-candidate's past misjudgements.

JasonB
JasonB

It is not "intolerant" to fight bigotry and intolerance. Homophobia, like sexism, racism, anti-Semitism, etc isn't merely a difference in opinions or beliefs. Quite the contrary, it is a dehumanizing position and set of behaviors that creates heirarchical ideas of certain human qualities being better or more desirable than other qualities.


Eich was rejected for his bigotry. He was not punished for his beliefs. The fact that he even allows himself the authority to judge another's sexuality enough to form a belief is appalling to the say the least. While some manifestations of sexuality may be more common than others, none are right or wrong. The same goes for many aspects of human nature. 


Gays are under no more obligation to respect or accept Eich's bigotry than Jews were obligated to respect or accept Hitler's. It is not merely a difference of beliefs or opinions. Gays are under no more obligation to respect or accept Eich's bigotry than women were obligated to respect or accept the sexism that kept them from being able to vote or receive equal pay. Gays are under no more obligation to respect or accept any bigotry than are other races obligated to respect or accept racism against them.


Does this equate sexuality with one's sex or race? Insofar as one can be discriminated against because of it, yes. However, sexuality seems to be the only aspect that people still give themselves the authority to deem as "right" or "wrong." That itself is the logical fallacy. It is no more right or wrong to be straight or gay than it is right or wrong to be male or female, black or white, short or tall. While some people still seem to have a hard time grasping or understanding this, that will not always be the case -- just like it's no longer the case that people devalue women or blacks.


Even if being gay were a choice, only if one is already against homosexuality to begin with is it deemed an undesirable choice. Christianity is a choice. Does that mean that all of Christianity can and should be rejected? It doesn't matter if sexuality is immutable or a choice. People are free to choose to be anything other than heterosexual if they so wish. Other people do not have the right to treat them any differently because of their sexuality. Those are the principles of freedom. Demanding respect for bigotry and its subsequent discrimination has nothing to do with the principles of freedom. To claim that it is intolerant not to accept bigotry and discrimination is to claim that there is no such thing as morality. It would have been immoral for people not to have stood up and rejected Eich.


Many folks like to throw out what they see as facts about the institution of marriage or the history of sexuality throughout the world. What many people deem as "traditional" marriage wasn't the face of marriage 100 years ago. Until quite recently, marriage was not about family or procreation. Marriage was about property and wealth. Marriage was institutional and was not companionate. It wasn't even about love.


Many folks also like to pretend that any non-heterosexual behavior has not only been frowned upon in perpetuity but outlawed everywhere since the beginning of time. That is no where near the case. Many cultures have accepted non-heterosexual behavior, some cultures even exalted such behaviors. 


The point here is not to prove anyone wrong but rather to note that if you are going to state as fact so many aspects of history on which you are grossly misinformed, you are only dooming yourself to failure. You should know the history of marriage and sexuality before presuming that the current system (or what you want the current system to be) is the only way, the right way, or the traditional way. 


It is none of those things.


You can continue to believe that being gay is "wrong" all you want. You can not believe in being gay all you want. It's your right to do so. However, your rights end there. 


You can also believe that sunshine is wrong. You can believe it as strongly as you want and go outside and shake your fists at all the dang sunshine that is so, so wrong. It's totally your right to believe that. 


It will probably accomplish just as much as believing that being gay is wrong. Doesn't mean you shouldn't run out and give it a try. 


All that dang sunshine! How dare it!?!

Aristotle
Aristotle

If you believe in freedom of speech and believe that tolerance requires a diversity of opinions to actually be something meaningful then I suggest that you consider joining me in sending feedback to the Mozilla organization about their treatment of Eich and letting them know that you are uninstalling Firefox because of this.

tslewis4
tslewis4

Welcome to the new McCarthyism. We just never learn, do we?

Kendall
Kendall

I am in full support of gay marriage, I'm against prop 8.  But I'm also utterly opposed to railroading people out of work because of personal opinions they hold.


Today the bullies won.  Today tyranny gained a toehold.  The next time some religious group throws out an employee or leader because he donated money to planned parenthood or gay rights group, remember this day for you laid the foundation.

Aristotle
Aristotle

Every single bully that you remember from grade school or high school who called other kids "fag" were gay themselves.


I was bullied by one. I never called anyone a "fag". I never did anything to deserve the bullying.


I am calling all of us to stand up to the bullies. We must bring an end to their tyranny. Make your voice known.


Enough is enough. Fight for freedom. Don't let the bastards win.

sleeplessinva
sleeplessinva

As a supporter of gay rights, when I learned that Mr. Eich had resigned as CEO, I couldn't help but feel sadness and shock. Somehow through it all, Mr. Eich somehow became the receiving end of being a victim of being bullied. For what reason? For being intolerant.

Since when did the tolerant became so intolerant of other people's choices? If they are not with us, they are with the enemy? Sounds a bit all too familiar, or perhaps like all revolution, it is just that, a revolution back to the beginning when we were all intolerant of everything and anything.


Is Mr. Eich intolerant? No one knows for sure. The media and what seems to be the whole lot of the tech world seemed to have painted Mr. Eich as the typical anti-LGBT Mitt Romney styled 1% arrogant douche bag. Even Mozilla has got on the safe PR bandwagon as to say they have taken Mr. Eich out to the back of the shed and put him out of his misery because somehow in a span of a few weeks his leadership skills in a technology company was somehow compromised by his personal beliefs that the definition of marriage is between a man and woman.


I for one am disgusted by this turn of events and am very disappointed that Mr. Eich got bullied. Just because you are LGBT, it doesn't give you the right to bully other people. Just because you support gay rights doesn't give you a blank check to co-opt a movement of social equality.


If we are to be accepting, we must also accept the fact that there are ignorant people in the world and bullying them into having the same beliefs as you makes you no more different than the people on the other side of the argument.

Czarek
Czarek

Guys let's start using Yandex! Since Mozilla found it fit to persecute a man for exercising his right to choose, Lets exercise our right to choose and delete Firefox (Also Google in is the same path). I hope they pay hard for what they've done both in this life and the next! Expressing a view on gay marriage is not a crime nor is it hate speech! It's called freedom of speech!

Bc82
Bc82

If these speech police can fire the likes of Brendan Eich, then they won't hesitate to scan my user information to ensure their idea of political correctness.

Free speech comes with a price... Tolerance of dissenting opinions. Otherwise we might as well submit to Vladimir Putin.

Goodbye Firefox. Looking for a new browser.

You have to pick a unique one
You have to pick a unique one

I don't get it.  I voted against Prop 8, but most voters voted for it.


He's looked down on because he was part of the majority ????

vaszely
vaszely

Liberals are so tolerant-as long as you agree with them.  I will have to rethink using Mozilla

.

squiggleslash
squiggleslash

@geb910If you want to be a CEO, you need to have a number of qualities, including mutual respect and good judgement. Claiming not to be homophobic, but donating money towards hate campaigns against consenting adults does not show any of these qualities.


It's not his views or that he expressed them that caused Eich to be asked to leave Mozilla, it's how he expressed them, the disconnect between his claimed positions and the campaigns he funded, the refusal to distance himself from his /actions/, and the lack of respect he had amongst Mozilla's users, developers, and others as a result.


It's possible to express an opinion in a reprehensible way that shows you to be unfit for certain positions. That's what happened here.

squiggleslash
squiggleslash

@oxo OkCupid probably didn't complain earlier because while Eich's actions were known earlier, he was only made a CEO a few days ago.

In case you missed it, the problem wasn't that Mozilla employed someone who donated to a hate campaign against consenting adults but that they appointed him their leader.

Also, yes, I've noticed a lot of "defenses" of Eich from all across the political spectrum. Most, however (if not all) ignore the arguments that were made against Eich, instead substituting a straw man where apparently everyone who wasn't happy about Eich wanted him fired for not being entirely comfortable with gay marriage. Nobody argued this. And defenses of Eich that argue against that position are worse than useless.


squiggleslash
squiggleslash

@MikeInMI Strawmen are so easy to blow down. I commend you on your abilities to blow them away!


In the meantime, do you think someone should be appointed a CEO who co-funds an actual hate campaign - claiming they're, for example, a danger to children - against a group he claims to have no problems with, especially with large numbers of those people being employed by the same group, having to work alongside him?


BrianZoh
BrianZoh

@Going In Sane I'm so weary of people claiming the "they cannot change the definition of marriage to suit their needs" when it's been changed so many times throughout modern times.


Hey, remember that great time period where women were property and men were paid to take them off their parents hands? Remember when the Mormon's thought it was great for men to have many spouses? Remember when divorce wasn't an option? Remember when you weren't allow to choose who you married at all, it was set up by your parents or village leaders? Hey remember when marriage laws were gender neutral until the evangelical Christians panicked that gays were actually going to stand up and try the unthinkable?

tmgotech
tmgotech

@JasonB  Jason, how would you position yourself if the belief in question was not gay rights but was, instead, abortion rights?  


Regardless of whether you are on the pro-abortion or anti-abortion side of that argument, would you honestly say that a CEO's $1,000 contribution to the "other" side would make him or her a bigot in your eyes?  Would you rally just as hard to have that CEO trashed as a bigot and hounded out of a job simply due to existence of that $1,000 contribution, absent any evidence that this person based a single business decision on that that stance?


I'm guessing not, because abortion has taken a back seat to THE hot button issue of the day, gay rights.  And Communism before that.  And being a witch a couple of centuries ago.  It's THE issue whereby if you are on the "wrong" side, you are automatically branded a zealot/bigot/demon.  Hands down, regardless of your other beliefs and how those beliefs manifested themselves in actions that might impact others.  


I'm fully in favor of gay rights, by the way, but I am also just as firmly in favor of someone's rights to contribute to political and social causes without it becoming the de facto evidence that they are a bigot.  


By God, for Prop 8 to make it onto the ballot, I'm guessing (I don't live in California) that a sizable part of the population out there had to support the measure in the first place.   Are all of those California citizens bigots?  Do they automatically forfeit the right to be in any position of power within an organization?


If so, then the Thought Police have truly set up shop in your world.


CommonSensePlease
CommonSensePlease

@JasonB  

Disagreeing with someone isn't homophobic or bigoted.  You can think something is wrong without being afraid of it, or mistreating people who do that particular action.  It's only the left that has such a problem separating opinion from action, which is why they usually see the need to demonize and attack anyone with a differing opinion, instead of just agreeing with their right to the opinion.


Freedom of speech is worthless if you don't support the opinions you disagree with.  I would love to see your reaction if the story was reversed.  If someone was fired for supporting gay marriage you would suddenly be a Constitutionalist, I'm sure.

CommonSensePlease
CommonSensePlease

@Kendall  

Thank you for being reasonable and logical about it.

So many support this type of action as long as it's for 'their side' and don't realize if you only support free speech when you agree with it, there is no free speech.

Kendall
Kendall

@Aristotle  Today the bullies won.  Should you have been made to quit school because your beliefs differed from those around you?  That is what happened today.

Aristotle
Aristotle

@sleeplessinva  I hope that you understand that tolerance is not equal to support or agreement. If Eich believes that you have the right to have a different opinion than he does then that is the very definition of tolerance. Tolerance cannot exist in a monoculture.


I hope that you are tolerant of different viewpoints of view and I hope that you understand that things are not black and white.


Don't assume that people on the opposite side "hate" gay people because most of them do not.


When I was growing up, I was bullies by a student who later on turned out to be gay. He bullied me and other students calling them "fags" in order to make themselves feel better.


Unfortunately, happiness is a choice. Anyone can choose to be happy without seeking first to crush others under their feet.


I don't hate gay people. I hate fascists and their sexual preferences are irrelevant to me. What I hate is those who would seek to silence the speech of others and those who would seek to use their influence to disenfranchise others. I hate bullies.

Kendall
Kendall

@nobby  The inventor of Javascript is no fascist.  He has earned a lot of respect, more than you will ever have.


Fascism is what deposed him though, so you seem to be a big fan of it.

Death.Magnet
Death.Magnet

@nobby


He could also move to any of the other 230+ countries where it is not excepted - one of which is very close to replacing the US as the global financial superpower.

hd433
hd433

@You have to pick a unique one
"Most voters" doesn't equal "most citizens", and that number drops even further when the people who voted but didn't vote on this proposition didn't tick that particular box.
Most citizens here in the Golden state were against prop 8, as evidenced by polling up to a few months before the vote. The scare tactic commercials put out by the supporters of this prop were just FOUL and despicable, and they worked to get people who were afraid of gays off the couch and into the booth.

Prop 8 won mainly because no one actually though that such a law could ever be created in this state, a leader in the fight for gay rights, and so the vote "against" was half hearted. They were wrong, and their error shows what happens when you don't pay attention. The Tea party came into power the same way.

jeffreylowy
jeffreylowy

@vaszely   I am as liberal as they come. I support gay marriage. I think what happened here is beyond stupid. Brenden is allow to have his own opinion. He didn't use Mozilla funds to make the donation, so theres not much I can say. Your comment makes you sound as ignorant as the people who called for his head.

DennieP
DennieP

@Camp X-Ray  @Camp X-RayThere are many heterosexuals who are also "angry", using your words.  The gay community is very small and not a very large political force on its own. The only way anyone will pay attention to any human rights cause is when a majority of sympathizers get involved.  Slavery in the U.S. is a perfect example of that type of movement.  So, "angry" anti-gays, please move aside. You are blocking progress and the majority who are in favor of progress will always win out eventually.

clparkerson
clparkerson

@tmgotech Yes. They were all bigots. Every single one of them that voted for prop 8. Because they voted to take rights already granted away from people born differently than they were. and given your tone and words here, I don't want your darn support if this is how you think, thank you.

RichardLBrandt
RichardLBrandt

@Kendall @Aristotle  The bullies did not win, they lost.


Gay marriage does not affect the rights of non-gays one bit. Laws that prohibit gays from marrying affects the legal rights of gays.


If someone supported a law that says people of different races cannot marry I would feel exactly the same way, and I would decide to refrain from doing business with that person.


This is a legal issue--whether a "spouse" gets custody of a child, or can adopt a child, or gets survivor's benefits if the other dies, or gets tax benefits. Gay couples deserve the same legal rights as other couples.


Equal rights under the law. Plain and simple.

Kendall
Kendall

@hd433 @You have to pick a unique one  Your fundamental problem is that Obama being on the ballot attracted a large number of voters in favor of Prop 8.  It probably would not have passed otherwise.

Death.Magnet
Death.Magnet

@hd433 @You have to pick a unique one


Prop 8 won because the majority of (CA) voters that went to the polls voted for it - the same as any other issue that passed.


It wasn't even reversed because of the content of the law, so expect to see it come up again.


BrianZoh
BrianZoh

@Lothsahn Nice try there but you miss the key point: One group is actively trying to take away or prevent others from living their lives as they see fit, and the other group is simply reacting to that action.


In other words, you don't get to call someone out as a bigot who is standing up to bigotry. I know you really want to, and it's a temptation we've all had, but it's simply not applicable.

Lothsahn
Lothsahn

@clparkerson Bigoted - having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of one's own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others.

 
I find it terribly ironic that those who villify Eich and Prop 8 supporters appear to have the strongest belief in the superiority of their opinion and the greatest intolerance of the opinions of others.

I think you should really listen to the points that CommonSensePlease and tmgotech make.

Sev Bradley
Sev Bradley

@RichardLBrandt @Kendall @Aristotle    I'm anti ANY sex marriage, I think it's a personal thing between two people. Why should the state be involved? "Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someones lifestyle, you must hate, or fear them. The second is the love someone means you agree with everything they believe, and do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise convictions to be compassionate."

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 301,278 other followers