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

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443488]way to compare attempted murder to donating to something he believes in.[/QUOTE] Not even going to try point out any wrong points in it?

[QUOTE=SgtCr4zyGunz;44443410]Hey man if you aren't a bigot why does it just so happen that you are [I]always[/I] on their side in every thread like this trying to justify and rationalize every fucked up thing they do? Comcastic you legitimately are a bigot with a persecution complex which is pretty much the worst kind of person. If you are so fucking sensitive about being called out for the fact that you defend assholes then maybe you stop posting in these threads in the future.[/QUOTE] Are you calling me a bigot because I disagree with you? Or are you calling me a bigot because you automatically assume I'm anti-LGBT, which is not true. And who is "they" and what are "they" doing? [editline]3rd April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=deadoon;44443509]Not even going to try point out any wrong points in it?[/QUOTE] He has a personal belief and donated to a cause that represents his belief. I am in no right to tell him what to support or what not to support. And I am damn sure not in the right to make him resign over his personal beliefs or his donations. As much as I may disagree with it.

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442030]liberals only like free speech when it supports their agenda.[/QUOTE] He's fully free to say or donate to whatever he wants, but other people are just as free to say or boycott him.

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443488]way to compare attempted murder to donating to something he believes in.[/QUOTE] I'm calling your statement absurd by using a stupidly obvious example how about "I paid $1000 to some politicians in the hopes of helping out their campaign for a law that would make me feel better about my hatred of certain kinds of people, but the legislation didn't pass so clearly my money and views aren't actually harmful"

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443536]He has a personal belief and donated to a cause that represents his belief. I am in no right to tell him what to support or what not to support. And I am damn sure not in the right to make him resign over his personal beliefs or his donations. As much as I may disagree with it.[/QUOTE] Of course you are not in the right to make him resign, after all resignation is a voluntary thing. As the figurehead of the company he personally and PUBLICLY supported a ban on gay marriage. The people in the company found out and protested his actions and beliefs as they are contradictory to the supported ones by the company. Basically no different than calling out the potus for going against party beliefs and goals. Make sense? He was paying money to push those beliefs on others, which is not right.

[QUOTE=deadoon;44443648]Of course you are not in the right to make him resign, after all resignation is a voluntary thing. As the figurehead of the company he personally and PUBLICLY supported a ban on gay marriage. The people in the company found out and protested his actions and beliefs as they are contradictory to the supported ones by the company. Basically no different than calling out the potus for going against party beliefs and goals. Make sense? He was paying money to push those beliefs on others, which is not right.[/QUOTE] Except he wasn't the CEO of Mozilla when he made those donations, he just worked for them. I can see if he frequently made donations to such a cause while being the CEO, how that would be detrimental to the company. I just honestly believe that as long as he isn't letting his personal views get in the way of doing his job, he shouldn't be reprimanded. People who are Anti-LGBT have the same right to have job as a CEO in a company just as anyone who is Pro-LGBT, regardless of what you donate to. The fact that he is being shit on for something he believes in (even though it's fucked up) is just wrong to me. It's pretty much "support our cause or lose your career". Either way his donations were fucking stupid, just as the desire to get him fired was. If he did his job correctly as CEO, didn't harass gay employees, and kept his beliefs to himself, then there is no reason for this.

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443731]Except he wasn't the CEO of Mozilla when he made those donations, he just worked for them. I can see if he frequently made donations to such a cause while being the CEO, how that would be detrimental to the company. I just honestly believe that as long as he isn't letting his personal views get in the way of doing his job, he shouldn't be reprimanded. People who are Anti-LGBT have the same right to have job as a CEO in a company just as anyone who is Pro-LGBT, regardless of what you donate to. The fact that he is being shit on for something he believes in (even though it's fucked up) is just wrong to me. It's pretty much "support our cause or lose your career". Either way his donations were fucking stupid, just as the desire to get him fired was. If he did his job correctly as CEO, didn't harass gay employees, and kept his beliefs to himself, then there is no reason for this.[/QUOTE] if the cause he supported was the removal of black peoples rights, would it be okay then?

[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] I agree with your statement but disagree at the same time, although this is his belief that gay marriage should not be allowed, being a big time CEO you shouldn't really give these actions any chance to hit media, and if you do, that's your own fault, and realistically, a racist person would not be able to run a company, nor a xenophobic, so why should gay employees working for Mozilla feel uncomfortable when the big guy in charge dislikes your sexuality?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44443759]if the cause he supported was the removal of black peoples rights, would it be okay then?[/QUOTE] Not the slightest bit, if you mean rights such as the freedom of speech, association, religion. But I think I'm starting to understand what you guys are getting at. Sometimes I'm too quick to play devils advocate. His donations WERE trying to strip the rights of LGBT to marriage, so I can see where you guys are coming from. Sometimes I hold too firmly on the belief that people should be able to have their own views on things without being chastised for them, however that should only be limited to when they attempt to take away the rights of others.

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443885]Not the slightest bit, if you mean rights such as the freedom of speech, association, religion. But I think I'm starting to understand what you guys are getting at. Sometimes I'm too quick to play devils advocate. His donations WERE trying to strip the rights of LGBT to marriage, so I can see where you guys are coming from. Sometimes I hold too firmly on the belief that people should be able to have their own views on things without being chastised for them, however that should only be limited to when they attempt to take away the rights of others.[/QUOTE] Anyone is free to have whatever view they like, no mater how backwards or incompatible with reality. This however wasn't just a case of him being a bit of a dick, he was [i]trying[/i] to prevent a certain group from having equality.

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443885]Not the slightest bit, if you mean rights such as the freedom of speech, association, religion. But I think I'm starting to understand what you guys are getting at. Sometimes I'm too quick to play devils advocate. His donations WERE trying to strip the rights of LGBT to marriage, so I can see where you guys are coming from. Sometimes I hold too firmly on the belief that people should be able to have their own views on things without being chastised for them, however that should only be limited to when they attempt to take away the rights of others.[/QUOTE] The thing is he wasn't being chastised by a government body, or even a corporation, he was being chastised by a bunch of individuals boycotting. If he would have been arrested or even fired for his beliefs you would have a point, but instead it was a bunch of people voicing their disapproval.

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443885]Not the slightest bit, if you mean rights such as the freedom of speech, association, religion. But I think I'm starting to understand what you guys are getting at. Sometimes I'm too quick to play devils advocate. His donations WERE trying to strip the rights of LGBT to marriage, so I can see where you guys are coming from. Sometimes I hold too firmly on the belief that people should be able to have their own views on things without being chastised for them, however that should only be limited to when they attempt to take away the rights of others.[/QUOTE] Hold whatever views you want. No ones going to throw you in jail or ruin your life for it. But why should your views that black people or lgbt's or whoever else should be subjugated be respected at all? I will never take away someones right to believe or think what they want but that doesn't mean they shouldn't face social consequences for being utterly bad people. wanting to take away anyones rights is worthy of social chastisement and in cases like this where you're the face of a pro lgbt company, it's non sensical to have that person retain their position.

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443220]This is wrong, what he donated to never even passed. This is pretty much a witch hunt. Now bring on the "omg how can you support a bigot what do you hate gays" and dumbs. Better stick to your guns and stop using javascript too.[/QUOTE] "Nazis tried exterminating all the jews, but they didn't succeed, omg its such a witchhunt" is all I'm hearing here :v:

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443885]Not the slightest bit, if you mean rights such as the freedom of speech, association, religion. But I think I'm starting to understand what you guys are getting at. Sometimes I'm too quick to play devils advocate. His donations WERE trying to strip the rights of LGBT to marriage, so I can see where you guys are coming from. Sometimes I hold too firmly on the belief that people should be able to have their own views on things without being chastised for them, however that should only be limited to when they attempt to take away the rights of others.[/QUOTE] SO basically if it comes to race, you are not OK with discrimination, but when it comes to sexuality, you are OK with discrimination. I understand now.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44441931]Wow. Two weeks of pressure and he quit? Does anyone else find that super strange? I'm sure there was a fair bit of pressure over his actions but I'm just finding him actually resigning over it really strange.[/QUOTE] Mozilla is a very progressive company that deals in a very progressive business. I'm not surprised at all he was choked out so quickly. [editline]3rd April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=toaster468;44442030]liberals only like free speech when it supports their agenda.[/QUOTE] Why is this being rated dumb? It's entirely true, for all groups of people.

-snap-

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443731]Except he wasn't the CEO of Mozilla when he made those donations, he just worked for them. I can see if he frequently made donations to such a cause while being the CEO, how that would be detrimental to the company. I just honestly believe that as long as he isn't letting his personal views get in the way of doing his job, he shouldn't be reprimanded. People who are Anti-LGBT have the same right to have job as a CEO in a company just as anyone who is Pro-LGBT, regardless of what you donate to. The fact that he is being shit on for something he believes in (even though it's fucked up) is just wrong to me. It's pretty much "support our cause or lose your career". Either way his donations were fucking stupid, just as the desire to get him fired was. If he did his job correctly as CEO, didn't harass gay employees, and kept his beliefs to himself, then there is no reason for this.[/QUOTE] This "both sides are wrong" middleman bullshit doesn't fly here pal. Only one side is in the wrong and it's not the side that is refusing to associate with somebody who invested in stripping liberty from certain people over arbitrary reasons.

[QUOTE=Durrsly;44442113]It isn't just an opinion, he donated money towards anti-gay laws. He was the CEO of a Pro-LGBT company.[/QUOTE] Which begs the question, what if his views changed? Why would you, someone whose donated money to anti-gay causes, look to work at an openly Pro-LGBT?

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;44444153]Why is this being rated dumb? It's entirely true, for all groups of people.[/QUOTE] that would be great if the statement didn't explicitly single out one ideological group with intent to paint them as wanting to fight one-sided battles??? [QUOTE=Swilly;44444297]Which begs the question, what if his views changed? Why would you, someone whose donated money to anti-gay causes, look to work at an openly Pro-LGBT?[/QUOTE] it would probably have been nice of him to come out and say "hey this isn't what I'm about anymore" and use the stance as a platform to promote positive change instead of running away to escape the heat- [QUOTE=Swilly;44444356]Every news source I've seen basically points to him wanting to continue the inclusiveness and open nature of Mozilla.[/QUOTE] it still stands then, why would he run off so hard

[QUOTE=toaster468;44442030]liberals only like free speech when it supports their agenda.[/QUOTE] Hahaha [I]what?[/I] How does this post have so many agrees? Where in this entire scandal are liberals calling for an end to free speech? Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich didn't resign because liberals legislated out the first admendment, he resigned because Mozilla didn't like the heat they were getting for hiring a homophobic CEO. The fact that he resigned after only two weeks told me he was either about to do it anyway (CEO's don't stay at one company for more than a few years) or got a fat severance package. I've read a lot of dumb posts on SH but this one, wow. Keep truckin with that persecution complex I guess.

Every news source I've seen basically points to him wanting to continue the inclusiveness and open nature of Mozilla.

Brendan Eich has the right to donate money to whatever group he wants Brendan Eich has the right to endorse any position he wants People have the right redress their grievances with this endorsement, whether it be speech, print, or monetary donation Mozilla didn't want this guy as their CEO because they were catching a lot of flak so he resigned. This has nothing to do with free speech. This is a company doing what they think is in their best interests. They could have easily double-downed like Chick-fil-A and rode a train of conservative Christian business but they chose not to. [QUOTE=ForgottenKane;44444153] Why is this being rated dumb? It's entirely true, for all groups of people.[/QUOTE] How is it "entirely true"? There is nothing in the liberal idealogy that endorses the removal of free speech. Liberals love free speech.

[QUOTE=dai;44444317] it still stands then, why would he run off so hard[/QUOTE] Probably because of all the flak that Mozilla itself is getting, and they make an internet browser, they know the people of the internet don't pay attention in their echo chambers.

[QUOTE=Comcastic;44443220]This is wrong, what he donated to never even passed. This is pretty much a witch hunt. Now bring on the "omg how can you support a bigot what do you hate gays" and dumbs. Better stick to your guns and stop using javascript too.[/QUOTE] It's definitely good for the company since it's no longer in disarray. For everything else? Probably going to take longer. The event won't automatically make bigots change their views, it's just going to make them more quiet about their discrimination.

[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;44444153]Mozilla is a very progressive company that deals in a very progressive business. I'm not surprised at all he was choked out so quickly. [editline]3rd April 2014[/editline] Why is this being rated dumb? It's entirely true, for all groups of people.[/QUOTE] I'm a liberal(I guess) and I'd never take away anyones right to say anything

[QUOTE=dai;44444317]it would probably have been nice of him to come out and say "hey this isn't what I'm about anymore" and use the stance as a platform to promote positive change instead of running away to escape the heat- it still stands then, why would he run off so hard[/QUOTE] He probably didn't want to come out like that in fear that the opposing side would also start a shitstorm claiming that mozilla is trying to "push the gay agenda". That's probably why he chose to word it the way he did. Also, he probably ran off due to people saying "yeah, I read his statement, but it's not good enough for me." He tried apologizing and asked for time to prove that he wasn't going to change mozilla's inclusiveness, but the people protesting this (mainly the GLADD community) were not satisfied, and would never be satisfied unless he was removed from the company. This just makes it seem to me, in my eyes, that the people who wanted him removed (GLADD and the likes) aren't pushing for the "fairness, equality, and tolerance" that they preach. This makes it look like they don't want to change the way people treat and respect each other, but instead wants to punish anyone who disagrees with them, no matter the situation. I mean really, I do support the LGBT community and hope for equal rights for all, but it's these kinds of stunts that make me re-think who my support is behind. I could never support a gay marriage ban, or anything that promotes blatant discrimination, but I can't support a community that won't give people a chance to prove themselves either....

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;44444558]He probably didn't want to come out like that in fear that the opposing side would also start a shitstorm claiming that mozilla is trying to "push the gay agenda". That's probably why he chose to word it the way he did. Also, he probably ran off due to people saying "yeah, I read his statement, but it's not good enough for me." He tried apologizing and asked for time to prove that he wasn't going to change mozilla's inclusiveness, but the people protesting this (mainly the GLADD community) were not satisfied, and would never be satisfied unless he was removed from the company. This just makes it seem to me, in my eyes, that the people who wanted him removed (GLADD and the likes) aren't pushing for the "fairness, equality, and tolerance" that they preach. This makes it look like they don't want to change the way people treat and respect each other, but instead wants to punish anyone who disagrees with them, no matter the situation. I mean really, I do support the LGBT community and hope for equal rights for all, but it's these kinds of stunts that make me re-think who my support is behind. I could never support a gay marriage ban, or anything that promotes blatant discrimination, but I can't support a community that won't give people a chance to prove themselves either....[/QUOTE] No I think it's just that gay people take it personally when they're actually being/been persecuted.

Everyone's going on about how he was taking away peoples rights. The guy made a donation, legally, to a bill that hadn't even been passed yet. His opinion is skewed but it wasn't illegal, and said donation now cost him his job. I'm not sure how I feel about this.

[QUOTE=Oizen;44444879]Everyone's going on about how he was taking away peoples rights. The guy made a donation, legally, to a bill that hadn't even been passed yet. His opinion is skewed but it wasn't illegal, and said donation now cost him his job. I'm not sure how I feel about this.[/QUOTE] Whether it's illegal or not is completely irrelevant. 60-70 years ago it was legal to discriminate against and mistreat African Americans. That does NOT make it acceptable though.

[QUOTE=Oizen;44444879]Everyone's going on about how he was taking away peoples rights. The guy made a donation, legally, to a bill that hadn't even been passed yet. His opinion is skewed but it wasn't illegal, and said donation now cost him his job. I'm not sure how I feel about this.[/QUOTE]Doesn't matter if it was legal or anything, doesn't mean he deserves to be respected for it. And he represented Mozilla, and they decided he wasn't good representation. Big deal that it was legal, he's still a bigot.