Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich Steps Down

[V8 Ninja]

So...people are defending a bigot.

Defending the right for a bigot (or a Christian with religion based views, take your pick) to express his views while being gainfully employed? Yeah sure, the opposite seems cruel. How is the gay community blacklisting a Christian fundamentalist any different from the Christian fundamentalists blacklisting a homosexual?

So...people are defending a bigot.

are they? show me where!

You know, you guys do bring up good points. I guess I need to edit my original comment.

 

[chikusho]

So if the facts don't work for you, you deem them ''crap'' and claim that they're made up. That ''crap'' is gonna stay and I'll keep smearing it all over this so called ''equality'' bullshit that so many of you hide behind.

I'm not even taking a stance on whether it's true or not. It's crap because it's completely irrelevant.

Want to know how many people fabricate a few of those ''attacks'' just to get there way?

Yes, I do want to know. Please show me a credible source that says attacks against LGBT people are made up. Please prove to me that the millions of people who are harassed all over the world on a daily basis are faking it for attention, and that the thousands of suicides by young LGBT people across the US is a false statistic. Go right ahead.

Actually, Gestapo is the perfect word to describe it. It's a term that I picked up from a bisexual friend. This might come as a shocker to you, but there are quite a few of the LBGT crowd who are just as miffed about the ordeal

Ok, let's get this straight. Protesting your new CEO for wanting to deny you your civil rights is treating him like someone who wants to cause genocide, and is wrong. But calling the protestors by the name of people who actually caused genocide is perfectly fine?

Like, are you even reading what you are typing?

 

[Bombiz]

(...)I mean, you can't honestly believe that hating someone because of his ethnicity/religion/gender/sexual orientation/etc is morally equivalent to the desire of these persons not to be hated, disadvantaged, or worse, nor is acting on these respective beliefs.

they are. discrimination is still discrimination, even if that discrimination is from Jews agians Nazis. there are no "good" or "bad" guys in the world. only "people majority agrees with" and "people majority disagrees with". there is no some kind of higher morals at play. its all human defined. Nazis shoudl be persecuted for crimes they did based on our made up justice system, not "because their are nazis". Meaning of ddiscrimination does not change just because you discriminate against people majority does not like.

There you have it. Committing genocide is morally just as fine as not wanting to be exterminated, if only enough people believe it is. That's moral relativism pushed ot the extreme. I take it that you don't believe in the existence of fundamental human rights of some sort either?

I wonder though... Would you feel the same way though if you were at the receiving end of such discriminatory practices? What if the majority suddenly decided that you, Strazdas, don't deserve to live anymore? Would you still excuse them, because, you know, that's just the majority opinion and the majority is apparently always right?

Honestly, if all people thought like you the world would be a horrible place. It is not, though, because in the past, there were people who believed strongly that what the majority at that time thought was right was wrong, deeply wrong, and often risked their lives in fighting for what they believed in.

i'm pretty sure he's saying that the majority opinion isn't always right.
He could could also be hinting at how LGBT people and other minority are becoming the majority in North America. and that once that happens they'll behave in a same manner as the previous majority. Since power corrupts.

 

[CloudAtlas]

(...)

Actually, Gestapo is the perfect word to describe it. It's a term that I picked up from a bisexual friend. This might come as a shocker to you, but there are quite a few of the LBGT crowd who are just as miffed about the ordeal

You quoted the wrong person there mate. But since I generally share the views of the person you actually quoted... no, it is not a perfect term. It's grossly inappropriate, for the reasons stated by chikusho.

He could could also be hinting at how LGBT people and other minority are becoming the majority in North America. and that once that happens they'll behave in a same manner as the previous majority. Since power corrupts.

Oh please. First, LGBT people can never become a majority, it is impossible. And even if, what are you expecting? That LGBT people will outlaw heterosexual marriage? Don't make me laugh. Second, fearmongering about what might happen when the non-white people take over as a justification for continued oppression, that's one of the oldest tricks of the racists' playbook. I hope you are aware of that.
Needless to say, nothing of that sort has ever happened in the past, and you can live quite happily in many places on this globe where whites are a minority.

 

[CloudAtlas]

6.) This is a shining example of "Us vs Them", and I have also said that in the previous thread. If you don't 100% perfectly and fully support everything the LGBT movement wants, you will have a screaming mob with pitchforks on your heels, attempting to make your life miserable at every turn. (...)

I am obviously generalizing here.

And grossly exaggerating too. And contradicting yourself:

There are a great deal of people in this movement that are shaking their head at this incident as well (...)

If even the "movement" itself doesn't agree on every single issue, how could you fully support everything that everyone in this movement might want?

 

[ToastiestZombie]

i dont and neither do you.

whether or not people boycotting firefox should block it is irrelevant here. the point is this websites rules forbid you for advocating any software that blocks any part of it because advertisement.

If I was advocating I'd have been banned already. I'm simply saying that if you're going to boycott one of Eich's creations then you should boycott them all, and since it's impossible to use a lot of features of this site (or almost any for that matter) without Javascript they'd have to either not go here or use NoScript. If you want pure evidence then look at the source code for almost any website and look for the tags. And again, I don't use NoScript and neither should anyone else, but I personally find the amount of picking-and-choosing that happens when it comes to most boycotts to be pitiful.

 

[EiMitch]

Well it all depends on your definition of innocent. If the company you work for actively hurts/persecutes others and you're aware of it then you bear some of the responsibility.

Yeah, because there are so many good jobs paying a living wage available these days that each and every employee has a clear moral choice. /sarc

Seriously, if you're going to be that judgmental of rank-and-file workers, why stop there? Why not apply it to those who work for a bigot? You're using a double-standard to rationalize another double-standard.

also this is your 3rd post after quitting and you still havent gotten back to me on the discussion you started 2 days ago that you seemingly ended by calling me a bigot.

What for? Not only do you still equate past actions with "personal beliefs," you also rationalized that prop 8 didn't even suppress anybody's rights. Why would I want to waste time with someone so deep in denial?

 

[Bombiz]

(...)

Actually, Gestapo is the perfect word to describe it. It's a term that I picked up from a bisexual friend. This might come as a shocker to you, but there are quite a few of the LBGT crowd who are just as miffed about the ordeal

You quoted the wrong person there mate. But since I generally share the views of the person you actually quoted... no, it is not a perfect term. It's grossly inappropriate, for the reasons stated by chikusho.

He could could also be hinting at how LGBT people and other minority are becoming the majority in North America. and that once that happens they'll behave in a same manner as the previous majority. Since power corrupts.

Oh please. First, LGBT people can never become a majority, it is impossible. And even if, what are you expecting? That LGBT people will outlaw heterosexual marriage? Don't make me laugh. Second, fearmongering about what might happen when the non-white people take over as a justification for continued oppression, that's one of the oldest tricks of the racists' playbook. I hope you are aware of that.
Needless to say, nothing of that sort has ever happened in the past, and you can live quite happily in many places on this globe where whites are a minority.

hey man i'm on your side. i was just saying what he might have been saying. also as a note. i'm not white. I'm Iranian. though i guess you could call that if want.

 

[EiMitch]

Before any debate occurs, I feel it's important that everyone understands Proposition 8, and I don't believe the majority here to have such an understanding.

They do. They just prefer to pretend its no big deal or that its not really discrimination. Its not an honest error in judgement on their part. Its a reverse-victim rationalization. They're telling themselves that people expressing their beliefs by protesting is an act of oppression, whereas materially contributing to an actual oppressive law is just expressing a belief. You can't reason with people that Orwellian. I've tired.

Speaking of which, the debate occurred days ago. You're pretty late to the party.

 

[Bombiz]

Before any debate occurs, I feel it's important that everyone understands Proposition 8, and I don't believe the majority here to have such an understanding.

They do. They just prefer to pretend its no big deal or that its not really discrimination. Its not an honest error in judgement on their part. Its a reverse-victim rationalization. They're telling themselves that people expressing their beliefs by protesting is an act of oppression, whereas materially contributing to an actual oppressive law is just expressing a belief. You can't reason with people that Orwellian. I've tired.

Speaking of which, the debate occurred days ago. You're pretty late to the party.

better late then never.

 

[EiMitch]

I'm pissed at this because he was forced to step down not because of his work ethic but for somersetting absolutely IRRELEVANT.

So if someone with a history of antisemitic discriminatory practices subsequently runs a business, during which he shows no sign of his past bigotry, would you then tell Jews protesting that business to bug off?

Also, I'm getting tired of hearing "he was fired/forced to step down." There were other ways Eich and Mozilla could've handled this. Other ways to try to make right with LGBTs. Eich chose to step down.

 

[Vegosiux]

They do. They just prefer to pretend its no big deal or that its not really discrimination. Its not an honest error in judgement on their part.

Yes, I'm sure non-American posters have exact knowledge about what Prop 8 is. After all, the world consists of "USA" and "people nobody cares about, so fuck them, right".

Or something. I don't know. But you're really not helping your position with a statement like that. It just makes you look more dogmatic and...

...oooooooh I get it. We all got Poe'd here, or something?

 

[Bombiz]

They do. They just prefer to pretend its no big deal or that its not really discrimination. Its not an honest error in judgement on their part.

Yes, I'm sure non-American posters have exact knowledge about what Prop 8 is. After all, the world consists of "USA" and "people nobody cares about, so fuck them, right".

Or something. I don't know. But you're really not helping your position with a statement like that. It just makes you look more dogmatic and...

...oooooooh I get it. We all got Poe'd here, or something?

[joke]POE!! YOU MEAN WE ALL GONNA PLAY PATH OF EXILE!! OH BOY!! [/joke]

 

[Kopikatsu]

Before any debate occurs, I feel it's important that everyone understands Proposition 8, and I don't believe the majority here to have such an understanding. So let's take a look at it.

Proposition 8 was a Californian (U.S.A.) ballot proposition seeking to make an amendment to the state constitution that would outlaw same sex marriage by legally defining marriage to be between that of a man and a woman (also as recognized by law) exclusively. As a result, it would greatly impact same sex couples, their power of estate over one another (in such cases as medical and financial decisions when in a coma, or last will and testament for example) and their right to custody of their children, or that of future children. The proposition was passed in 2008 by a wide margin, before later being found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court and was thus rendered void.

Before you accuse others of not understanding what Prop 8 was, maybe you should make sure that you understand it first.

First, civil unions were already in place before Prop 8 (Specifically, civil unions were granted the same rights as marriage in 2005; Prop 8 was voted on in 2008). So no, nobody's rights were being affected by Prop 8. It was only to get civil unions to be called 'marriages'. It was purely an issue of semantics.

Second, it was voted in by 52%. 2% is not a 'wide margin' by any measure.