OKCupid Asks Firefox Users To Support LGBT Rights, Switch Browsers
- Thread starter Fanghawk
- Start date
Ah, that ol' chestnut.DoctorM said:
Has anybody actually bothered to look at what NOM, created to be the spearhead of Prop 8, actually does?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Organization_for_Marriage
(sidenote: orson scott card used to be one of the board members between '09-'13, but stepped down after they lost prop 8, which indicates more involvement than just money)
They actively pursue any and all means to paint LGBT as inhuman. They make numerous ads and automated call campaigns attempting to scare people into believing outright lies in order to gain support and funding. They also employ these measures to intimidate politicians into voting in their favor by singling out pro-gay individuals and destroying their careers, than by implying that the others better fall in line with such publicly posted signs as "You're Next" (gee is that similar to blackmail and threats?). While Prop 8 failed, they still succeeded in pushing voters into voting in similar measures in other states through large capital injections of those campaigns, which have taken years to reverse (and most if not all of those reversals have had stays placed on them which completely invalidate the decision so that the opposing side can drag their feet as hard as they can while attempting to further increase support or buying time for a possible loophole, without actually presenting any new arguments). They have recently opened another campaign to target the rights of transgender people as a fallback if they don't succeed in targeting gays and lesbians.
They are A HATE GROUP. There is nothing remotely defensible about what they do. They will not stop until these lies are law. They do not care how many lives they have to destroy to get there.
This is what they use their money for. This was what Eich's $1000 dollar donation was used for.
And this is just "another viewpoint".
I don't have to invoke Godwin's law, do I?
If Eich no longer shares (or ever shared) the viewpoint that NOM holds, he would be best served if he publicly severs any possibility of a connection with them. If he does not, he will be subject to the scrutiny of the people whose lives were, and still are feeling the consequences of support like his. His views may be his to own, but his actions did not stop at his views. If this was an honest mistake, and he does not actually advocate these kinds of hateful actions, then he has nothing to gain by trying to be vague about it, or avoiding any apology for the mistake.
Why should he get a free pass for what he did, if others did not? Why should the company who hired him continue to overlook something like this if they support the kind of work environment that is in contradiction with these actions?
Ah, no. Two things: NEW CEO, and I haven't paid a dime to Mozilla for their browser, and as such, my money isn't getting rerouted anywhere, as opposed to other sources... *cough* Orson Scott Card. Oh, nope, three things: SIX years ago? If he hasn't kept on donating, he may very well have changed his mind, or doesn't shove his opinion down other's throats any more... or, or, or...
In short: Don't care, actually kind of peeved that OKCupid even brought it up. (For the record: I'm bi, just so no one says, "Well, obviously, you're straight.")
Captcha: Cancel for free...? Uh... shouldn't that be the case anyway?
In short: Don't care, actually kind of peeved that OKCupid even brought it up. (For the record: I'm bi, just so no one says, "Well, obviously, you're straight.")
Captcha: Cancel for free...? Uh... shouldn't that be the case anyway?
And what does that CEO say?MarsAtlas said:
"I do not insist that anyone agree with me on a great many things, including political issues, and I refrain from putting my personal beliefs in others' way in all matters Mozilla, JS, and Web. I hope for the same in return."
This issue is far more complex than people give it credit. Many people support equal rights for the LGBT community but have problems only with the word "marriage" being used for religious reasons. Others have trouble morally condoning homosexuality but firmly believe that it is unreasonable to deny them rights. These people are wrong and misguided, but calling them hateful is extreme - they do not hate.
And this man, of all people, is not being unreasonable. He made a modest donation 6 years ago to proposition 8. Before he was CEO. He has never said anything hateful or malicious about LGBT, he has never done anything hateful. We don't even have any evidence that he is hateful. That statement above? That is the boilerplate statement OkCupid is talking about.
Not to mention his more recent statement on becoming CEO. This man has basically said that he is not going to renounce his personal belief, but he will give absolutely everything else that is asked. He has even stated he will actively support and promote same sex equality and rights within Mozilla.
This man isn't meeting us half way, he is practically on our side.
But we have to be the thought police. It is not enough that he relinquishes every point. It is not enough that he actively works to promote our views. He must now even think the same thoughts as us, or at the very least lie to make us feel better. And when he refuses that one point, when he refuses to be bullied into lying about his opinion so we can have some hollow victory, we call for his head.
I know a man down the street. About 60 years old. He has a family, 6 kids, all grown now. He recently fought cancer and won by the skin of his teeth. He regularly donates time and money to help provide inner city children with education despite his physical weakness and his own somewhat shaky financial situation. He is also of the opinion that LGBT's should have all the rights we have with one minor exception: the term marriage should be reserved for male-female marriages, because in his mind marriage is a religious institution. They can be married, he would just like them to call it anything else. And for this reason he supported Prop 8.
He is old and his ideas are old fashioned. He is wrong, and I do not excuse his view. But he is not a hateful person. He is kind and wishes the best for everyone. I see this protest and I can't help but see my neighbor nailed to the wall, his livelihood destroyed or forced to lie about his own thoughts for fear of persecution.
Do you have any idea how hateful this makes the LGBT community look? That they are trying to destroy a man, not because of what he did or said but because of what they think he thinks? This does not help remove hatred from the world, it promotes it.
If people want a reason to hate the LGBT movement, we are giving it to them right now.
Now, I know that you already mentioned you're fully in support of also protecting unpopular opinion under free speech, but this sentence still freaks me out. This is exactly what the LGBT community is so greatly complaining about: Being socially pressurized into never ever speaking up and coming out, because society doesn't accept it. At this point, this whole thing is just turning it all around. The hypocrisy inherent to that is simply disgusting.Zachary Amaranth said:
A lot of people have become so obsessed with this idea of "social injustice" that they refuse to see that they themselves are gaining the upper hand - and exploiting it just like the people they just hushed out. This is not okay.
Could we, for once, try and not hate each other instead of calling for heads to roll just because someone disagrees with you? This is approaching the point where I actively refuse to take a stance on this because both sides are doing the same shit. And if you want to accuse me of "being part of the problem" just because I do so, be prepared for me to actively oppose you instead. Good riddance!
No. That is patently wrong.UltraHammer said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimination_in_the_United_States [Nope]
You can get fired for being gay. There is zero state-level protection for LGBT employees in Texas, Florida, Mississippi, Georgia, Idaho, Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, North Dakota, North Carolina, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, Wyoming. And in some states there is only protection on the basis of sexual orientation and not for gender identity, so transmen and transwomen suffer.
There is real discrimination and oppression happening in the US still. Just because you see gay, white cisgendered male characters on TV shows and same-sex marriage has passed in several states does not mean that this fight is over. It's nowhere near over.
On topic: It's a flimsy justification and a good PR move by OKCupid.
Firefox has proven infinitely more stable than Chrome and to be honest, I'm not too concerned about the LGBT movement when it's being co-opted by a bunch of SJW's who weren't part of the original movement for tolerance in these respective groups.
To actual LGBT activists (read: those of you who want equality and don't want to be treated any different or be special snowflakes), I apologize if this guy is vocal about his opinions in an obnoxious way. Still, he may be a CEO but he's not entirely responsible for the end product. The entire Mozilla team is. More importantly, me using Firefox doesn't mean I support the dude, it's just a web browser. And I figure we can be reasonable and calm adults about this, so please do let me know if he goes nutso and super oppressive at any point and I'll do what I can to find a more competent internet browser.
Until then, I'll keep going on and use the product on the grounds of the quality of the product and not worry about who made it as long as he's not causing anyone any harm or trouble.
Yours truly, everyone on the internet who is aware internet activism is a complete laughing stock at the moment due to radical social justice warriors acting under the mindset of 'Your rights end where my feelings begin'.
We'll get rid of these fuckers eventually guys, just don't give up the fight.
To actual LGBT activists (read: those of you who want equality and don't want to be treated any different or be special snowflakes), I apologize if this guy is vocal about his opinions in an obnoxious way. Still, he may be a CEO but he's not entirely responsible for the end product. The entire Mozilla team is. More importantly, me using Firefox doesn't mean I support the dude, it's just a web browser. And I figure we can be reasonable and calm adults about this, so please do let me know if he goes nutso and super oppressive at any point and I'll do what I can to find a more competent internet browser.
Until then, I'll keep going on and use the product on the grounds of the quality of the product and not worry about who made it as long as he's not causing anyone any harm or trouble.
Yours truly, everyone on the internet who is aware internet activism is a complete laughing stock at the moment due to radical social justice warriors acting under the mindset of 'Your rights end where my feelings begin'.
We'll get rid of these fuckers eventually guys, just don't give up the fight.
As another note, even though Chick-fil-A promised to stop donating to these types of organizations, it still is actually donating to these organizations (having only removed 1% of that funding), they've just stopped talking about it and have defaulted their public stance to "assumed neutral" by not saying anything at all.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/01/29/memo-to-media-chick-fil-a-hasnt-ended-its-anti/192434
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/01/29/memo-to-media-chick-fil-a-hasnt-ended-its-anti/192434
You know at some point you need to separate. If I were to cut every service from my life that employs some asshole to the top that I disagree with, then I would have to live in the woods in a home I built myself. I would have to raise, and grow my own food, make my own tools, and just drop out of society all together. I am for QUILTBAG rights, I despise hate in all of its forms, but every company has assholes, it's unavoidable, and to be honest I'm tired of boycotts based on a single asshole, because that gives that single ************ too much power and I'm not letting assholes ruin my enjoyment of life, fuck 'em.
Actually, a fair number of people have mentioned it in their replies, so yep, pretty sure they read it. ^_^viking97 said:
Can any other browser run all the plugins and custom scripts i run? No? Well then i dont have a choice now do i.
No. Chick-stupid-name actively works against gay marriage. Firefox CEO has personal beliefs that are different but does not influence anything in his company.MorganL4 said:
Remember that prop 8 wasn't anti gay, it was anti-gay marraige.
He Could actually accept gay relationships as natural for all we know, and just believe in the 'biblical sanctity of marraige'.
I know people who have no problem with gays, they just don't want gay marriage to be called 'gay marriage' as they see marriage as a holy institution. They have no problem with gays getting all the rights of any married couples they just want it to separate to their christian institution of marraige.
people shouldn't be so judgmental based on one action. Maybe someone should try and get in contact with him and ask his opinion before crucifying him?
He Could actually accept gay relationships as natural for all we know, and just believe in the 'biblical sanctity of marraige'.
I know people who have no problem with gays, they just don't want gay marriage to be called 'gay marriage' as they see marriage as a holy institution. They have no problem with gays getting all the rights of any married couples they just want it to separate to their christian institution of marraige.
people shouldn't be so judgmental based on one action. Maybe someone should try and get in contact with him and ask his opinion before crucifying him?
Bush was RIGHT! By not supporting the Wars promoted by a democratic leader you are fundamentally going against the concept of democracy and the nation. And that is FINE! You do not have to support the state as it is, much like you do not have to support a company as it is, but at the same time support the country/company as it could be. There is no hypocrisy here. The argument that you can go against the executive+congress+senate+supreme court+ by extension the American people and their votes, and say that you support the country is silly, you support the concept of the country without the very democratic system that is fundamentally it's nervous system and brain. America without the system is a meaningless empty concept that you can put whatever ideas you want into. The "No real Scotsmen" fallacy comes into play here, we can just call it "that's not really AmericaRJ 17 said:
"Again though, it is fine to be against your country when you think it is doing wrong. Too many of us are obsessed with the idea that you must be patriotic at all times to the point where we turn our opposition and sedition into patriotism when it's really not. And I say this as someone who is not even American, as we do it here in Israel all the time and I saw similar things in Canada when I lived there. My favourite argument was "Harper is ruining the country" when Harper was voted more then enough times into power and therefore represents the very will of the country.
You know this is actually an interesting point. I think what it amounts to is that even if one has the moral high ground in a given case, there are lines that you still shouldn't cross. I think the figures in history that understood this properly recognized that there are limits to how far you can go just swimming up stream. And that you have to sometimes follow the current and go for little victories, and little buy little those little victories will win out in the big picture.Kliever said:
In other words, Pick your battles. It makes no sense to go after every single person who doesn't share your belief. It's inherent inefficiency aside, your message will get lost along the way and you'll end up exhausting even your allies or worse, you'll create a movement against you that just hates you and doesn't care what your point is. All advocates walk that line.
Take global warming. Al Gore once blamed republicans for global warming and in doing so created a political party angle to an other wise completely science based problem. In other words, there are people who are climate skeptics because Al Gore had to make some jokes at his opponents expense. Of course it would take the LGBT community a bit more of an extreme out burst (perhaps a violent riot etc) to achieve that same kind of irrational opposition however it's important to take care and consider the big picture.
The goal is equal rights, and cultural acceptance, not catharsis.