Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
People have held all sorts of religious beliefs over the millennia that we find not merely distasteful but morally repugnant today: slavery, blood sacrifice—even human sacrifice. Which beliefs are acceptable and which are not? Who is the arbiter?
Oh, I agree. The point is that you can not just arbitrarily claim that people actions and beliefs are based on bigotry or hatred and dismiss that they are motivated by true religious beliefs, when the opposite is true in most cases. As far as what is acceptable and what is not, depends on how much it impacts others. In MY OPINION, it is unacceptable for a civil servant to refuse to issue a lawful marriage license based on their religious beliefs but I think someone ought to be able to decline to make a wedding cake, especially when there is another place in reasonable distance that is willing to, based on religious beliefs. It is fine for a person to refuse a blood transfusion based on religious beliefs, but you can't be another person's doctor and refuse to give one based on your religious beliefs.
Great. Better uninstall Internet Explorer and Google Chrome and Opera too... and wait.....are there any browser software companies who don't support gay rights?
And what operating system do you use? Microsoft? Apple? Better uninstall those too. Brand of Computer?
Hmmm....I guess that's why you will have to send a letter instead of an email.
The problem isn't that they support gay rights (good for them, seriously), the problem is that they fired someone for a personal political choice that had nothing to do with the company or how they would run it. I would feel the same way if he had been run off for contributing to the group that opposed prop 8. So, continuing to use those companies is not an issue. Now, have you disabled your JavaScript? (Hint: if you are using your computer with any efficiency, we can pretty much assume that is a big no.)
Glad you at least did a little research, though it took prodding. Or, were you withholding information to strengthen your weak point? Two weeks is an unimportant time period; other than he is a man who understands that the idea of Mozilla is more than he. It is why he reluctantly accepted the draft by the BOD in the first place. The Directors who were for him and then resigned were small people, without principle.
the numbers of employees who 'wanted him gone' were not even in the left's magical, (a reference that you may not grasp if indeed you are not a citizen of the great United States), majority.
Now as to the reference alluding to 'mobs' (most specifically James Madison's discussion in Federalist paper number 10, but others as well). If you are indeed a foreigner it is is understandable that you might not understand the historical context of the Federalist papers, in which the quite eloquently discussed various forms of government were regarded and then discarded in favor of the Constitutional Republic. The founders did not favor, nor want a true democracy, in which, as they characterized it, "Mob Rule", ruled.
So, again as your lack of understanding demonstrates, this is not some misguided fear, or homophobia; rather that it is counter to the basic principles of how this country was formed, what it is based upon and how conservatives in general - though I speak only for myself - view the off with his head mentality of the various 'rights' movements.
If you are a citizen of The United States, then you have only your lack of civics education to blame. That, laziness, or a willingness not to engage in substantive discussion.
Mr Eich is much more than a programmer, though yes he was at one time; ~ 20 or ~25 years ago. Ignorance, ignorance, ignorance. Sheesh.
Yep, they didn't want tyranny by the majority. Yet that's exactly what you advocate.
By the way, you didn't answer my question. Last line of my post.
Here it is again.
Spoiler
Do you have mobs of angry homosexuals terrorising the dust bunnies under your bed too? Get a dustpan.
Oh, I agree. The point is that you can not just arbitrarily claim that people actions and beliefs are based on bigotry or hatred and dismiss that they are motivated by true religious beliefs, when the opposite is true in most cases. As far as what is acceptable and what is not, depends on how much it impacts others. In MY OPINION, it is unacceptable for a civil servant to refuse to issue a lawful marriage license based on their religious beliefs but I think someone ought to be able to decline to make a wedding cake, especially when there is another place in reasonable distance that is willing to, based on religious beliefs. It is fine for a person to refuse a blood transfusion based on religious beliefs, but you can't be another person's doctor and refuse to give one based on your religious beliefs.
So, because some people claim that adults having sex with children is part of their "true religious beliefs", then we should allow adults to have sex with children?
The problem isn't that they support gay rights (good for them, seriously), the problem is that they fired someone for a personal political choice that had nothing to do with the company or how they would run it. I would feel the same way if he had been run off for contributing to the group that opposed prop 8. So, continuing to use those companies is not an issue. Now, have you disabled your JavaScript? (Hint: if you are using your computer with any efficiency, we can pretty much assume that is a big no.)
I'm not the one hypocritically whining and crowing about boycotting and uninstalling a free web browser.
The man can have his personal opinions. But that's difficult when he is a CEO leading and representing the company and his personal opinions have been shown to be directly opposed to the value statements of the company.
The problem isn't that they support gay rights (good for them, seriously), the problem is that they fired someone for a personal political choice that had nothing to do with the company or how they would run it. I would feel the same way if he had been run off for contributing to the group that opposed prop 8.
Mozilla is a private company. It can hire or fire who it wants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1
So, continuing to use those companies is not an issue. Now, have you disabled your JavaScript? (Hint: if you are using your computer with any efficiency, we can pretty much assume that is a big no.)
Why are Righties always so enamored with cutting off their noses to spite their faces???
Again, how in God's name is this a Free Speech issue? Where in the story did some government actor curtail his rights?
Your question reveals a basic lack of understanding of our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which prohibit an employer from discriminating on the basis of ones political affiliation, or religious beliefs.
If you had read the article I posted in my original post (which was a separate thread to address this very issue, but hijacked and moved to this thread) you would have seen where that author explained it very clearly, which gave me no reason to write my own version (why reinvent the wheel?). Here is what he said:
Yes, First Amendment rights under the Constitution address only the relationship between the individual and the government -- not private enterprise. But through a host of federal and state legislation, laws have been enacted over time that prohibit employers from discriminating against their employees on the basis of certain characteristics and further provide wrongfully terminated employees with legal remedies.
Generally, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of race, national origin, color, religion, and gender. Congress later enacted legislation that expanded discrimination to include age and disability. Eventually, discrimination under federal law came to include marital status, sexual orientation and political affiliation, as well. [snip] ... an employee cannot be wrongfully terminated in California or terminated on the basis of discrimination, that is, on the basis of age, race, sexual orientation, gender, disability, political affiliation, religion, or national origin.
Brendan Eich was forcefully terminated on the basis of his belief in traditional marriage, and for his support of Prop 8. His support was done privately, and he did not make this an issue in his business. It was because of the "thought police," that this became public, resulting in his termination. Free speech does not exist for conservatives. Mozilla is guilty of discrimination, and ought to be sued. At the very least, they should issue an apology.
Leftists ALWAYS demand totalitarian control of the populations they rule.
This is just another step towards that for them.
Ever read "The Road to Serfdom" by F.A. Hayek? He describes how the process works.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
