New Mozilla CEO resigns over anti-gay views

[LongTimeListener]

http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2014/04/03/mozilla-ceo-brendan-eich-resigns/#21721101=0

He got the job 11 days ago, then vowed to stay despite furious criticism over his activism, including a $1,000 donation in favor of Proposition 8. Employees started slamming him publicly, and OK Cupid urged its followers not to use Firefox.

He gone.

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.

https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/03/brendan-eich-steps-down-as-mozilla-ceo/

 

[Dick Whitman]

At some point, and that point is coming very soon, it will be as taboo to hold anti-gay rights views as it is to hold racist views.

The religious right will rationalize its change of heart accordingly. It will have to.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Yeah, that's already happening out in California. I know a few people who voted for Prop 8, but they sure don't bring that up in a crowd.

 

[YankeeFan]

Is the Prop 8 donation all they "have on him"?

I'd think there's have to be more for him to be accused of having anti-gay views, and to warrant any kind of boycott/call for his resignation.

 

[printit]

Ridiculous.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Is the Prop 8 donation all they "have on him"?

I'd think there's have to be more for him to be accused of having anti-gay views, and to warrant any kind of boycott/call for his resignation.

This is where we are.

 

[YankeeFan]

Is the Prop 8 donation all they "have on him"?

I'd think there's have to be more for him to be accused of having anti-gay views, and to warrant any kind of boycott/call for his resignation.

This is where we are.

So, if you're Barack Obama, and held the view that gays should not be allowed to marry, until 2012, that's ok.

But, if you gave money to a campaign that sought to make that opinion law, you're ant-gay, and should lose your job?

How does that work?

I agree that these views will look more and more outrageous as time goes by, but at the time, it was one of two mainstream opinions.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I have a feeling, just a guess, that he was offered the opportunity to renounce his donation (and possibly some other activity) and declined to do so.

 

[qtlaw]

You have to take this within the context of Mozilla's public persona.

 

[DeskMonkey1]

Is the Prop 8 donation all they "have on him"?

I'd think there's have to be more for him to be accused of having anti-gay views, and to warrant any kind of boycott/call for his resignation.

This is where we are.

So, if you're Barack Obama, and held the view that gays should not be allowed to marry, until 2012, that's ok.

But, if you gave money to a campaign that sought to make that opinion law, you're ant-gay, and should lose your job?

How does that work?

I agree that these views will look more and more outrageous as time goes by, but at the time, it was one of two mainstream opinions.

Oh, that's just politics. That's different.

And, I agree, I'm at the point where I get more than slightly agitated if someone makes an anti-gay remark. Some of that is probably overcompensation for anti-gay views I held as a kid.

 

[Smallpotatoes]

If he stayed around, just like the browser the company owns, he would have updated his views in 2 weeks.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Is the Prop 8 donation all they "have on him"?

I'd think there's have to be more for him to be accused of having anti-gay views, and to warrant any kind of boycott/call for his resignation.

This is where we are.

So, if you're Barack Obama, and held the view that gays should not be allowed to marry, until 2012, that's ok.

But, if you gave money to a campaign that sought to make that opinion law, you're ant-gay, and should lose your job?

How does that work?

I agree that these views will look more and more outrageous as time goes by, but at the time, it was one of two mainstream opinions.

It's like the "Duck Dynasty" guy. Organizations like GLAAD are on the mother****in' hunt right now. And if you find yourself in the cross hairs, you're finished. They are the NRA of the left, in a way.

 

[DeskMonkey1]

Yeah, it does seem that some LGBT supporters are so feverish that a straight guy could rebuff another man's advances and he'd be called a bigot. As I said in my previous post, I'm a guilty of calling someone a bigot prematurely.

 

[qtlaw]

This nicely frames the important distinction between freedom of commerce and freedoms from governmental intervention:

1. Society shares the costs of government, therefore the government needs to be neutral towards all;
2. Commerce however, a person should be free to choose with their pocketbook who they want to interact/spend money with

If you're selling a product, do you want to alienate anyone? Probably not smart to do so; especially for a ubiquitous product like Firefox.

 

[YankeeFan]

I'm really proud of all the folks who will also be boycotting any website using JavaScript.

 

[old_tony]

"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."

The beauty of it all is that they're completely unaware of the unintentional hilarity of this statement.

 

[poindexter]

Should the title be "anti-gay" or "anti-gay marriage"?

Or is there a difference?

 

[LongTimeListener]

Should the title be "anti-gay" or "anti-gay marriage"?

Or is there a difference?

Oh, I think YF was hinting up top that there is a difference.

But there isn't.

 

[poindexter]

The freaking bill passed in CA. This should be like shooting fish in a barrel for the LBGTs.

 

[bigpern23]

Should the title be "anti-gay" or "anti-gay marriage"?

Or is there a difference?

"I have no problem with gays as long as they don't marry." = "I have no problem with Negroes as long as they don't marry white women."

No, there's no difference between anti-gay and anti-gay marriage. Either you believe gays are humans who deserve the same rights as the rest of us or you believe gays are not entitled to the same rights as heterosexuals. And the latter is anti-gay.