BREAKING: Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich resigns amids anti-gay controversy - Polidicks

Don't you know, bigots are the real victims :(

[QUOTE=AntonioR;44441995]A person was forced to resign because of his beliefs. You need to be pro-gay to run a company today ?[/QUOTE] Pro-gay aka a decent human being, yes preferably.

[QUOTE=Hellsten;44442276]If you ask me, his political motifs and anti-gay position has little to do with his position at work if he's able to treat any homosexual co-workers just the same as heterosexuals. However, CEO being more of a public spokesman for the company I guess you'd want someone as neutral as possible. Idk.[/QUOTE] You're right they don't affect his work [I]but that doesn't matter.[/I] In the US you have teh freedom of speech, the [B]government[/B] can't punish you for saying gays shouldn't be allowed to marry. That freedom does not exclude social punishment however. That's what this is, and honestly it's a really good sign for equality in our future.

Why does his opinion on Gay Rights matter? Is he not allowed to have a personal opinion that has no effect on his ability to run a company? You can't just expect everyone to adopt gay rights all of a sudden, it's a slow process and it will continue to be a slow process of acceptance, just because some people don't yet agree with it doesn't mean that they should be publicly ridiculed for it. In their own time they'll come to accept it.

Somehow I knew this thread would devolve into a massive argument.

[QUOTE=The mouse;44442320]Why does his opinion on Gay Rights matter? Is he not allowed to have a personal opinion that has no effect on his ability to run a company? You can't just expect everyone to adopt gay rights all of a sudden, it's a slow process and it will continue to be a slow process of acceptance, just because some people don't yet agree with it doesn't mean that they should be publicly ridiculed for it. In their own time they'll come to accept it.[/QUOTE] Because he actively worked against gay rights.

[QUOTE=frozensoda;44442275]Your argument is invalid for the following reasons: 1. It doesn't matter how long it's been 2. His peers are the ones who mounted the pressure to force him out. This is exactly how our system is supposed to work. don't get me wrong here, if the government had forced him out I would be right along with half this thread saying this is ridiculous, but that's not the case.[/QUOTE] the poster i replied to basically said "he was working towards infringing peoples rights" considering that all he did was donate money to a piece of legislation, 6 years ago to boot (plus i havent heard anything else about his views but i'd like to hear them) i am somewhat confused by why this has suddenly become a big issue now, as opposed to in 2008 when he actually made the donation.

[QUOTE=The mouse;44442320]Why does his opinion on Gay Rights matter? Is he not allowed to have a personal opinion that has no effect on his ability to run a company? You can't just expect everyone to adopt gay rights all of a sudden, it's a slow process and it will continue to be a slow process of acceptance, just because some people don't yet agree with it doesn't mean that they should be publicly ridiculed for it. In their own time they'll come to accept it.[/QUOTE] I'm just gonna say this once and then re-quote it every time someone says this. If the CEO of 'Pear' computers donated $1000 to pass a bill that stopped inter-racial couples from being married, would you still say it doesn't matter? I seriously doubt anyone would, so how is it ok when the couples are gay?

[QUOTE=FunnyStarRunner;44442321]Somehow I knew this thread would devolve into a massive argument.[/QUOTE] It's not that massive. [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iz4gU6sVUv4&t=1m37s"]We're just having a conversation here.[/URL]

It's funny as fuck when bigots act like they're being oppressed or something, because nobody wants to deal with their shitty views

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44442344]the poster i replied to basically said "he was working towards infringing peoples rights" considering that all he did was donate money to a piece of legislation, 6 years ago to boot (plus i havent heard anything else about his views but i'd like to hear them) i am somewhat confused by why this has suddenly become a big issue now, as opposed to in 2008 when he actually made the donation.[/QUOTE] There was controversy in 2008, but he became the CEO of a Pro-LGBT company.

[QUOTE=The mouse;44442320]Why does his opinion on Gay Rights matter? Is he not allowed to have a personal opinion that has no effect on his ability to run a company? You can't just expect everyone to adopt gay rights all of a sudden, it's a slow process and it will continue to be a slow process of acceptance, just because some people don't yet agree with it doesn't mean that they should be publicly ridiculed for it. In their own time they'll come to accept it.[/QUOTE] If you bothered reading the thread you would have noticed the several places where it mentions that Mozilla has always been a very pro-LGBT organization. Having a ceo that is not only against LGBT rights but has actively donated to prevent LGBT people from having the rights they should is an awful idea. By doing such a thing Mozillla is compromising their own beliefs.

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442030]liberals only like free speech when it supports their agenda.[/QUOTE] this is literally on-par with saying that a malicious gay agenda exists, aka wacky conspiracy theories.

I didn't expect this thread to turn in such a argument when i made it.

[QUOTE=rhx123;44442016]There's a difference between having a belief and enforcing it on others. By giving money to an organisation which may use it to lobby anti-gay laws, he is supporting the oppression of gays - bit different than just believing it's wrong.[/QUOTE] Because it's a one sided thing right? No pro gay marriage ever use lobbyists.

[QUOTE=The mouse;44442320]Why does his opinion on Gay Rights matter? Is he not allowed to have a personal opinion that has no effect on his ability to run a company? You can't just expect everyone to adopt gay rights all of a sudden, it's a slow process and it will continue to be a slow process of acceptance, just because some people don't yet agree with it doesn't mean that they should be publicly ridiculed for it. In their own time they'll come to accept it.[/QUOTE] He has the right to a personal opinion, no matter how wrong that opinion is. He has the right to give money to his cause, no matter how wrong that cause is. It's just as true that other people have the right to disassociate themselves from people with vile and outdated ideas. Mozilla is saying that. They are saying he could no longer function as their leader because of the nature of his freely expressed opinion. That's how the system should work. No one shuts him up, but no one is forced to accept him either.

[QUOTE=frozensoda;44442349]I'm just gonna say this once and then re-quote it every time someone says this. If the CEO of 'Pear' computers donated $1000 to pass a bill that stopped inter-racial couples from being married, would you still say it doesn't matter? I seriously doubt anyone would, so how is it ok when the couples are gay?[/QUOTE] His views on Gay Marriage are irrelevant to his position as a CEO though. Yeah it sucks that he donated to against Gay Marriage but he's entitled to his personal opinion regardless of whether you agree with it or not. [QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;44442422]He has the right to a personal opinion, no matter how wrong that opinion is. He has the right to give money to his cause, no matter how wrong that cause is. It's just as true that other people have the right to disassociate themselves from people with vile and outdated ideas. Mozilla is saying that. They are saying he could no longer function as their leader because of the nature of his freely expressed opinion. That's how the system should work. No one shuts him up, but no one is forced to accept him either.[/QUOTE] That's fine then.

[QUOTE=The mouse;44442437]His views on Gay Marriage are irrelevant to his position as a CEO though. Yeah it sucks that he donated to against Gay Marriage but he's entitled to his personal opinion regardless of whether you agree with it or not.[/QUOTE] and the company who employs him isn't entitled to kick him out for it? Come on man even you have to see the flaw in your logic. edit: windwakr, I get it, you hate gay people. Stop spamming dumbs.

[QUOTE=Crimor;44442336]Because he actively worked against gay rights.[/QUOTE] He donated money, he didn't go around lynching homosexuals.

[QUOTE=AntonioR;44441995]A person was forced to resign because of his beliefs. You need to be pro-gay to run a company today ?[/QUOTE] Honestly good Being anti-gay at this point is against the human right to presue happiness and just simply be free' and as said earlier, he can use that money to enforce his agenda + his being anti gay effects the companies PR. [QUOTE=The mouse;44442320]Why does his opinion on Gay Rights matter? Is he not allowed to have a personal opinion that has no effect on his ability to run a company? You can't just expect everyone to adopt gay rights all of a sudden, it's a slow process and it will continue to be a slow process of acceptance, just because some people don't yet agree with it doesn't mean that they should be publicly ridiculed for it. In their own time they'll come to accept it.[/QUOTE] Gays are treated like second class citizens and have been forever denied the right to marry simply because they, out of something they didn't choose, were attracted to the same sex. Now its turning around now if you're antigay, something you can choose to be, you're treated different and man, is it fucking [B]awesome[/B] [QUOTE=toaster468;44442462]He donated money, he didn't go around lynching homosexuals.[/QUOTE] that's still not ok

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;44442415]Because it's a one sided thing right? No pro gay marriage ever use lobbyists.[/QUOTE] is it hard to understand that one side is trying to subjugate a group and the other is trying to be equal with everyone else? it's a big difference you know [editline]3rd April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=toaster468;44442462]He donated money, he didn't go around lynching homosexuals.[/QUOTE] so if someone donated money to anti interracial marriage groups, that's okay too?

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442462]He donated money, he didn't go around lynching homosexuals.[/QUOTE] And these guys forced a bigoted CEO out of his job, they didn't go around lynching anti-gay people.

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442462]He donated money, he didn't go around lynching homosexuals.[/QUOTE] Funny that you mentioned lynching, try replacing gay and lgbt in this thread with black and see how moronic some of these people are.

[QUOTE=The mouse;44442437]His views on Gay Marriage are irrelevant to his position as a CEO though. Yeah it sucks that he donated to against Gay Marriage but he's entitled to his personal opinion regardless of whether you agree with it or not.[/QUOTE] His views on gay marriage are not irrelevant to his position as the leader of an organization that is pro-LGBT.

[QUOTE=frozensoda;44442494]And these guys forced a bigoted CEO out of his job, they didn't go around lynching anti-gay people.[/QUOTE] The difference of course being these people targeted one man, and he exercised his right to take part in the democratic process.

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442513]The difference of course being these people targeted one man, and he exercised his right to take part in the democratic process.[/QUOTE] why are you so dedicated to saying that discrimination against lgbt minorities isn't exactly an big issue.

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442513]The difference of course being these people targeted one man, and he exercised his right to take part in the democratic process.[/QUOTE] so did they?

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442513]The difference of course being these people targeted one man, and he exercised his right to take part in the democratic process.[/QUOTE] Yep, and they protested against him [B]they exercised their right to take part in the democratic process.[/B] the only difference is they targeted one man, he targeted all gays. you see how this goes?

Good job, they made someone resign their position due to a bad thing he did in his past. Just like how people don't give ex-convicts job opportunities either. Good thing people can't redeem themselves.

[QUOTE=J!NX;44442536]Yep, and they protested against him [B]they exercised their right to take part in the democratic process.[/B] the only difference is they targeted one man, he targeted all gays. you see how this goes?[/QUOTE] That's odd there was no real vote for this, I may have missed that bit. I highly doubt that a majority of the people in the company voted to make him step down (more likely an extremely vocal minority). Seeing as how the people who don't really give a shit (aka the majority) didn't go on this massive moral crusade around the internet to keep him as CEO.