Best
517 Comments
Post
  • #5
    !
    Hmmmm.... In 2008 Mr. Eich declares that he is in opposition to gay marriage.

    In 2014 Mr. Eich is bullied into stepping down after publicly assuring everyone his opinion had changed.

    Meanwhile...

    In 2008 Barack Obama publicly declared:, " "I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. I am not in favor of gay marriage."

    In 2011 Barack Obama publicly evolves his stance on Gay marriage.

    In 2012 Barack Obama is re-elected.

    Now why do you suppose the public is this damned stupid?

    Is Mr. Eich not allowed to "evolve" his opinion?

    smh
  • #6
    !
    There was no indication he had changed his mind nor wanted. He should run for republican office somewhere in the south they would love him.
  • #14
    !
    @Speedieg - Mr. Obama was POTUS for 2 years before his opinion evolved.

    Shouldn't Mr. Eich be allowed that same opportunity?

    According to Mary, Mr. Eich was "...publicly reassuring everyone that he would support the gay community."

    Shouldn't he be afforded the same opportunity as Mr. Obama?

    A chance to change his opinion rather than be bullied on out the door?
  • R Load more replies

  • #40
    !
    The people spoke, did they not? This is capitalism at its finest. Supply and demand, and the invisible hand. Fyi, okcupid users weren't the only people using Firefox, nor the only people boycotting. If people supported Firefox so much they would have boycotted okcupid. Fascism is when companies control the people, looks like the people controlled the company.
  • #42
    !
    @kirbstomp1 Than maybe all companies should start posting or listing their moral and personal beliefs for everyone to see and choose whether to patronize them or not.
  • #44
    !
    @AlexMIA that would be awesome!!! We wouldn't have to keep an eye out for when they let things slip.
  • #46
    !
    @AlexMIA - its a free country bud, if someone has facts about you, such as you contributing $1000 to the repealing of a law, they are free to share them with the public. Whether or not a company chooses to release their beliefs is their choice. Remember corporations are people, so just like a citizen they have their rights. This all goes to the first amendment in my opinion, everyone has a right to the freedom of speech, to which extent they choose to exercise their freedom is their choice. It's understandable that if someone is gay they want to share the fact that a product they use is being headed by someone who fights against their cause. In my opinion I could care less, im worried about whomever can create the best product, and it's not Firefox anymore.
  • #63
    !
    @kirbstomp1 I sincerely doubt that the majority of Mozilla Firefox users took part in this and through their pressure forced him to step down. I've been using Mozilla Firefox for YEARS and I never heard of any such movement- in fact, I never even heard about the CEO of Mozilla Firefox or his position on gay marriage. Tactics like this remind me of what the very corrupt and murderous Albuquerque Police Department does. Their Union (APOA) have opened up a "Support for Albuquerque P.D. Rally", and with the eager help of all of the Albuquerque televised media, made it known with at least 13 days' notice that they will be conducting such a rally at 'Civic Plaza'(most cctv cameras in one location in the entire state of New Mexico so the people's government can keep an eye on the people and save their faces for future reference if they are not there for an 'approved activity'). The Anonymous-endorsed demonstration against Albuquerque P.D. WAS a grass-roots demonstration and it was spontaneous. The one in SUPPORT of Albuquerque P.D. is highly organized and will be packed CHOCK-FULL of off-duty APD officers, Albuquerque Police Officers' families, and other relatives, friends, retired APD Officers and their families, etc. They have already gotten 1,500 people that have 'pledged' to be there (500 more than took part in the spontaneous demonstration), but this is ERSATZ. These people don't represent the 521,000 people in Bernalillo County. They are a fabrication of the Police Union. I pretty much suspect the same of the 'people who boycotted Mozilla Firefox'. It was a highly-organized stunt put together by gay rights organizations. Now, READ MY WORDS: I am NOT against gay rights- I am for FREEDOM OF SPEECH for everyone, especially when I don't agree with them.'Freedom of Speech' for only those who agree with you is NOT Freedom of Speech at all, but MOB RULE.
  • R Load more replies

  • #25
    !
    So basically he was a person who believed in traditional marriage. He never said he hated gays, never called for their death or some violence against them, never said he would not hire a gay etc etc..

    You must conform. They also say the gay agenda does not exist. Yeah right.
  • #43
    !
    Yep, that about sums it up! I would love to know if there are any other people out there that may support their equality but not these tactics.
  • #259
    !
    News flash: gay marriage is part of traditional marriage. Turns out, traditions evolve. That's also why many Biblical marriage traditions, including polygamy, marriages to slaves, and Levirate marriage are no longer the norm.
  • #331
    !
    @Cal why should they have equal rights? They have tried to become a race, but there not. There race is to see who reaches hell first. We shut them down on chick fil a, and if we choose, we can do it again. Why do you call yourself gay, when you go making trouble all the time. Your kin to kkk. Should we give them a status in America?
  • R Load more replies

  • #8
    !
    Why is this intolerant? How does this differ from what focus on the family does or one thousand moms does? Why are their boycotts not an issue for you?.
  • #12
    !
    @Speedieg Both boycotts are. Two wrongs don't make a right. I wouldn't agree with either of their boycotts.
  • #19
    !
    Relax man. Part of the reason he stepped down was because Christian groups also started boycotting him.

    Besides, should black people tolerate the beliefs of the KKK just because they are Christian?
  • R Load more replies

  • #97
    !
    The "brown shirts" in NAZI Germany used the same tactics of intimidation -- and even worse to quell the opposition. The liberal "PC" is in, and the 1st Amendment is out. This is what happens in despotic regimes with their dumbed down leg-humping drones. IMO, of course. <wink>

    "It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed."
    --Vladimir Lenin
  • #159
    !
    @S-N-A-F-U
    The "brownshirts" in this country? OK , here comes the Nazi card. I'll pass out the tin foil hats for ya.....
  • #176
    !
    @Unfit2serve Yeah, but you DON'T have a reply, do you? You KNOW it's true. Conservatives and traditionalists aren't even ALLOWED to dissent, any more. Shades of the Soviet Union hovering over America, now, ladies and gentlemen. "Vee haf vays uff making you comply!" I gotcher tin hat right here, bitch.
  • #192
    !
    @ConanRepublic
    No...I can reply. Calling someone a "brownshirt" is the last desparate act of a true bigot. You get back to me when REAL brownshirts are invading your home, putting you in camps, etc. and we'll have the local "militant gays" come over and protect you and your family.

    We all have free speech-------so, please, dissent all you like. And your speech will be protected, unlike anyone who in the past 50 years spoke out in opposition to your conservative ideology got beaten, killed, dragged behind a pickup truck, etc. How many Gays have been butchered? How many straights?
    Get a clue, sweetheart. The knife hurts a bit when it is you that is getting the sharp end, doesn't it?
  • #215
    !
    @Unfit2serve

    It all fits.....<wink>

    "We are Socialists, we are enemies of the capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." Adolf Hitler, in his speech, May 1, 1927

    Sound familiar, hmmm?
  • R Load more replies

  • #72
    !
    I wouldn't have stepped down and forced them to fire me then sue for discrimination since I cannot hold an opinion and was fired for my straight beliefs.

    I think it's horrible that a group who is preaching tolerance used discrimination get someone removed from their job because he doesn't share the same belief. This is no different in my opinion than an openly gay CEO being removed from a company for being gay.

    Hypocrisy at it's finest right here!
  • #162
    !
    The public removed him.........not anyone else. The Board of Directors would have snoozed through the whole thing had it not started affecting bottom line.
  • #200
    !
    @Unfit2serve
    That's fine then anyone who offends John Q. Public should be removed.

    What about Obama? He was against gay marriage should we remove him?
  • #237
    !
    Intollerant anti-free speech gays are bigots and they know it, they just won't admit it. SCOTUS just said you can contribute however much you want because contribution to a political cause is free speech. Gays don't want free speech. The tyrannical minority strikes again. Wake up America.
  • #11
    !
    Once again politics infects another part of our private lives. The irony is the ones advocating it are the most vulnerable when the tables turn and scapegoats are hunted down, later. It's as inevitable as socialism followed by fascism.
  • #383
    !
    This is neither socialism nor fascism, it's pure capitalism. Why do righties throw around words they don't understand.

    This guy did something without considering how it might effect the business he is in charge of growing. Not only is that plain stupid, it's the sign of a very irresponsible and foolhardy manager.

    Mozilla didn't take any action until it hit their bottom line. His stupidity cost them lots of money, which is the perfect reason to fire somebody.

    It was pure capitalism
  • #428
    !
    @Poltal why do the same people claiming to be culturally diverse turn around and show intolerance for other cultures?
    Why do environmentalists live in the woods with septic tanks, commute in their cars to town every day, and terrorize wildlife on the way back home?
    Why do self-described "holistic" nature lovers advocate gay marriage?
  • #432
    !
    @jeffreyknee THis isnt intolerance. its freedom. People have no Obligation to use a Mozilla product. The rest of what you typed is just nonsensical whining
  • R Load more replies

  • #87
    !
    This is disgusting, just because you believe marriage should be between one man and one woman doesn't mean you are anti-gay. I hire gays, I rent to gays, I have gay friends and neighbors. I just happen to come from a conservative background and have seen the damage of raising kids w/o fathers.
  • #104
    !
    Business people should stay out of politics or pay the price......the Papa John's guy learned that one the hard way.
  • #150
    !
    @Fitz The government is we the people and we have every right to tell businesses that if they want to do business here they cannot pollute our rivers and air (the coal industry in the south should be more heavily regulated) and you have to pay people a minimum amount, etc. etc.

    On the other hand businesses, if they are trying to sell their products and services to the largest number of people possible, thus maximizing their profits, should beware of alienating large chunks of potential customers by taking sides in political issues.
  • #157
    !
    "I [...] have seen the damage of raising kids w/o fathers."

    Care to elaborate on this concerning gay marriage? This appears curiously disconnected with the topic at hand.
  • R Load more replies

  • #2
    !
    I don't understand how anyone could be opposed to gay marriage, there's not much logic behind it. But it's his right to have those opinions. As ignorant and bigoted I think they are, you shouldn't be fired for holding certain beliefs. If it would effect the progress of the company I could understand, but it doesn't seem like it was going to. This is no better than people being fired by conservative or religious companies because they hold liberal views.
  • #4
    !
    I'm opposed to it because of my religious beliefs.

    However, you are certainly correct that he shouldn't have been fired simply because of this.
  • #71
    !
    You are absolutely right one way or the other. And no, there was no logical reason to be in opposition to gay marraige or rights. But if there wasn't one before these tactics make a good arguement for one now.
  • #74
    !
    There are two sides to the issue. The rights side wins easily. What the objection is in using the term marriage. That is all it's about.
  • #98
    !
    Well he was not fired, he stepped down (but its likely he was asked to). Also a large amount of outcry was from Mozilla's own employees. If your company is revolting against your leadership it is very bad for company image and the bottom line.
  • R Load more replies

  • #352
    !
    No it wouldn't there is not law protecting gays in employment they are fired for it everyday. I myself was fired after a story aired in the local paper of the volunteer work I did for a local AIDS support group. I delivered food to people with AiDS, that's it. I was fired by my local Georgia company because it sent the wrong message to their customers. That was and is still perfectly legal.
  • #357
    !
    @Speedieg See I believe it's wrong coming from both sides. This guy lost his job from his company from a boycott. Whether he is pro gay or anti gay that just seems wrong, doesn't it. He was not fired for lack of job performance but instead of personal belief. It would be no different if he was gay, different race, foreign or whatever, it just seems wrong. Yet, this is how our country is evolving. There is no tolerance from any side, seems to only be "our way or the highway".
  • #31
    !
    I've used Mozilla's software for years. The politics of the company are irrelevant to me. If companies boycott Mozilla for political reasons, they won't get my business. Firefox rules.
  • R Load more replies

  • #68
    !
    Ah free speech is ok as long as the hipsters agree with your opinion. Got it.

    I have a feeling that Firefox is losing out to other browsers not because of it's ceo's beliefs covered by the 1st amendment, but rather because it's an inferior browser compared to other browsers.

    Gotta love the tolerance the left displays.
  • #262
    !
    Free speech is always OK. If your views are in the minority, whining won't help. Convince the majority that your views are more valid. Of course, that ship has already sailed in the case of homophobia.
  • #297
    !
    @Wilderide
    Majority or minority doesn't matter. By the constitution free speech is free speech.

    And gays are a minority. I have no problem with gays or gay marriage. Couldn't give two shits less. What I do have a problem with is the fact that one can't hold an opinion that is not in like with the PC police and if you do then you have no rights.

    The man said he doesn't believe in gay marriage and believes in marriage in the traditional sense. He never said he hates gays or anything negative. Yet he was run out of his job for having an opinion. One that the man didn't obviously spout. My guess is someone within the company didn't want him in charge so they leaked his campaign contributions to get him removed.

    Like I said if it had been me I would have forced them to fire me then sued on the grounds of religious discrimination and that I was fired for religious beliefs.
  • #298
    !
    @Wilderide
    Also believing in traditional marriage is not homophobic. Of course I know you all have to throw labels onto people to shut down discussion and paint people as evil.
  • #318
    !
    Nickels, you seem to be deeply mistaken about what the 1st Amendent does. It protects against government censorship, not against public disapproval.
  • R Load more replies

  • #39
    !
    I'm not sure I understand the mechanics of this "boycott" - I mean, how do you refuse to buy a free product?
  • #101
    !
    You can refuse to use it. Its all about browser stats. All websites track browser usage and know how many people visiting their site are using which browser.
  • #328
    !
    People just don't seem to see the implications here. This is a triumph of evil over good. It is bad enough that this was a cowardly reaction to a lynch mob by the Mozilla board of directors, which was tripping over its contradictions, irony and hypocrisy in its released statement, but it now seems to make it acceptable for an employer to fire or force the resignation of anyone who has views contrary to his own. It makes ideological purity tests a condition for employment.

    If people can be fired or forced to resign for "thought crimes" and freedom of belief, as happened to Brendan Eich, then a business can fire, or force the resignation of, someone who supports abortion, for example, or unionization, or gay marriage, or a political candidate, or any other controversial position or even, non-controversial ones.

    Brendan Eich should bring a lawsuit against Mozilla for religious discrimination, just as a public service. The Justice Department should look into this, as well, because what has happened to him strikes right at the very heart of democracy in America and implies serious civil rights issues.

    This is one of the most serious developments against civil rights that I have seen in a long time.

    What happened to Brendan Eich, however, is only the beginning. Eventually, there will be an enormous backlash once ordinary people come to understand that gay rights is not innocuous, and that it will seriously infringe upon their liberties of not only free expression and belief, but on their livelihoods, families, and social relations as well. Many ordinary people think that gay rights doesn't concern them and that they needn't care, which is why they mostly take a live-and-let-live attitude. But, they will be made to care when they lose their businesses, their jobs, their livelihoods and social relations because of ideological deviancy. Then a terrible backlash will ensue.

    "Give a man enough rope and he will hang himself." The gays seem to have enough rope, now.
  • #250
    !
    Liberals are so tolerant of other points of view. You can be part of the KKK like Byrd, or Kill a pregnant woman like Ted Kennedy, or make your fortune selling illegal booze like Joe Kennedy, but if you give $1000 to prop 8 years ago, the militant liberals will crucify you. Even the enemy of freedom, liberty, faith and family, Dictator Obama, said he was for traditional marriage. Yet these scum supported him until he flipped.
  • #189
    !
    Want to be gay? That's YOUR choice! But I do NOT believe, or respect, gay "marriage"!! Marriage is defined I the Bible (every Bible) as "a union between a man and a woman"! That is the way it SHOULD be!
  • #18
    !
    I myself am gonna boycott Mozilla an any connectionI support gay rights an Marriage but also support tolarence I respect others opinions an He was wrongfully bullied into stepping down because he has a different view It isn't as thou he was in a Political position or public office. We are heading in the wrong direction in this country if we expect others to be tolerant to ppl who arent
  • #45
    !
    @forddude12

    "Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."

    -Karl Popper

    If ones beliefs are one of intolerance than we as a society have a moral imperative to not tolerate those beliefs in order to maintain any sense of tolerance.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tol...
  • R Load more replies

  • R Load more comments...
Post