Mozilla chief resigns over same-sex marriage controversy

[Jingthing]

Again, please stop repeating that falsehood about Obama and Prop. 8. Obama was against Prop. 8. Even if he had been for it, which he wasn't, by now as the most pro gay civil rights president in American history (not even close) he would have basically repaired that damage. To gay Americans, Obama is our Lincoln, yes he did "evolve" on the issue but we always knew he would (in his second term).

Yes, I think this Eich affair will cause some unpleasant backlash and "the gays" will be blamed for it by anti-gay political factions. That's unfortunate, this case was a mess, but hopefully reasonable people, gay and straight, can learn from it for the future.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Jingthing

[ChiangMike]

So there's no outrage whatsoever about Obama coming out publicly against Gay Marriage. In fact he's a hero and a Lincoln. But this guy Eich - who donated 1,000.00 dollars to proposition 8 and went on the record stating two things: one - he supports the gay community and it being included in Mozilla's culture, 2. He has personal feelings/misgivings against gay marriage.

Now in the link's posted above we get more lynch mob theatrics - Eich is described as 'flooding' prop 8 with donations, and a major contributor the most virulent anti-gay campaign in American history. Really? Puh-leaze.

Is this drama queen month? TV didn't advertise this was gonna be drama queen month. So lets say it came out that Obama donated 100 bucks to prop 8 to get some votes... somehow I think we'd see a more muted response here. Do you know Eich personally? Has anyone - a single person - come out with an example of him being discriminatory other than taking a stance against gay marriage? Or is that enough now to summarize one's entire life/stance/meaning?

So sick...

Once again, this a repulsive and repugnant insult to those who have suffered genuine discrimination. Sorry, uptight christians worried about gay families explaining sex to their kids ain't it. Their commercials are dumb. Period. But taking any doubt or criticism by folks who aren't sure how to come to terms with things they don't understand on a personal level... and translating that to being nazis escorting gays to the camps, is a quantum leap in bullshit.

It also indicates a bully pulpit and no desire to genuinely make things better. Sad.

Edited April 6, 2014 by ChiangMike

[sustento]

Oh do get over yourself. You expect us to sit there and have 'tolerance' for the point of view of vile creatures like Fred Phelps (gone to heaven at last TF) yet you get your panties in a knot when a few poofs kick back? Here's the juice Jim. We tried tolerance. It didn't work. We aren't interested in tolerance any more Bwana. Too late!

Then be prepared to have some alpha-male hand you your lunch when you demand that he accept your lifestyle choices. Where can I buy a ticket because I don't want to be late as it won't last more than 3 seconds.

My Mum told me not to accept gifts from strange men

[Jingthing]

If it came out now that Obama had contributed money to homophobic pro discrimination Prop 8 when he was on record opposing it, and considering how he has evolved, well, you know, that'll happen when gay pigs fly over Moscow, because it's an absurd hypothetical. Nice try, no free toaster.

[ChiangMike]

Like my old colleague DC (who was just about the gayest, and maybe 3rd or 4th coolest, mutherf*ker I've ever known) used to say...

"any way you slice it... it's still baloney"

[Jingthing]

Please be clear gay Americans are not a monolith of same opinion, although some basic generalizations can be made, most gay Americans are democrats.

There does appear to be a radical faction that wants to "purge" all public figures who have supported anti-gay causes.

I couldn't tell you what percentage of gay Americans are that radical, but I'm sure it's a small minority.

The mainstream gay American position is the desire for legal equality under the law in marriage rights and legal protections against housing and employment discrimination based on GLBT status. We're not the gay Khmer Rouge but I can see the anti-gay right wing which is against legal equality for gays are going to milk this story for everything it's got.

Leadership within GLBT politics is difficult. There's no gay Martin Luther King, at least alive. I do think there will be a lot of discussion within gay political circles about what happened here, why and how it happened, and some soul searching about approaches in the future.

I don't think most people active in GLBT politics are happy at all to be associated with suppression of free speech or purging people from employment based on their political actions, even abhorrent ones, and yes supporting Prop 8 was abhorrent. So I think there is some hope there will be some learning and positive changes from this messy incident.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Jingthing

[GentlemanJim]

Please be clear gay Americans are not a monolith of same opinion, although some basic generalizations can be made, most gay Americans are democrats.

There does appear to be a radical faction that wants to "purge" all public figures who have supported anti-gay causes.

I couldn't tell you what percentage of gay Americans are that radical, but I'm sure it's a small minority.

The mainstream gay American position is the desire for legal equality under the law in marriage rights and legal protections against housing and employment discrimination based on GLBT status. We're not the gay Khmer Rouge but I can see the anti-gay right wing which is against legal equality for gays are going to milk this story for everything it's got.

Leadership within GLBT politics is difficult. There's no gay Martin Luther King, at least alive. I do think there will be a lot of discussion within gay political circles about what happened here, why and how it happened, and some soul searching about approaches in the future.

I don't think most people active in GLBT politics are happy at all to be associated with suppression of free speech or purging people from employment based on their political actions, even abhorrent ones, and yes supporting Prop 8 was abhorrent. So I think there is some hope there will be some learning and positive changes from this messy incident.

You seem to always put yourself in the authoritative position that you speak for all gay americans. The way I see it is the bully drama queen nature that you display does more harm for the progress of equality for gays than you can even comprehend. You are bigoted and intolerant yet you demand tolerance from everyone else. You want equality yet you deny it to everyone else.

What does it matter if Obama verbally supported prop8 and Eich with no voice donated a small amount of money. They BOTH supported prop 8, and by what Eich had said in interviews and statements since then he also had 'evolved' as you so ridiculously phrase it. You constantly have to push outrage, to the point that you destroy every thread that has a chance of reasonable discussion. I really dislike it and I bet you anything you wish, the normal 'let me get on with my life in equality' gay community dislike it also. There is no need for the anti gay right wing to milk this story for anything, you are doing all their work for them by spreading completely inappropriate hatred and false accusations about Eich.

[Jingthing]

That post was so inflammatory, so personal, and so twisted, it just can't be taken seriously. Others who are reasonable, perhaps stick to the topic.

Yes, the anti-gay right wing IS milking this story. That is happening:

http://www.advocate.com/business/2014/04/05/right-wing-rushes-former-mozilla-ceos-defense

Right Wing Rushes to Former Mozilla CEO's Defense

Two days after Brendan Eich resigned from his brief tenure as CEO of Mozilla, right-wing pundits eagerly claimed that the ouster was symbolic of the radical, anti-Christian homosexual agenda.

Also, President Obama NEVER supported Prop. 8. Saying he did when he didn't is just plain WEIRD.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Jingthing

[GentlemanJim]

That post was so inflammatory, so personal, and so twisted, that it's best just to let it stand as it's not worthy of being taken seriously. Others who are reasonable, perhaps stick to the topic.

One thing of substance that needs to be commented on and put to bed for good: President Obama NEVER supported Prop. 8.

You don't get away with the 'outrage' as easy as that Jingthing. Yes I really do hope it stands so that others can judge, I think that entirely appropriate thank you. The post is ON topic. So explain just what part of it is 'inflammatory, personal and twisted'? You are inflaming the entire thread. Show me anything I have written that is wrong or unjustified.

Talking of 'twisting' you are getting very desperate. Obama DID support Prop 8. That is a fact and just because you want to say he didn't does not make the truth any different.

I never said the anti gay right wing is not milking it, I said they do not NEED to, as you are doing all the work for them with your drama outrage and clear lack of application of equality. Obama supported Prop 8 mmmm ok, Eich supported it..mmm vilify him.

President Obama never supported Prop 8 but Senator Obama did. Stop playing with words.

Edited April 6, 2014 by GentlemanJim

[Jingthing]

You want to pick a fight, dude?
I am not interested. I know your game. It's boring.

Now I provided a link showing Obama came out against Prop 8.

Now you say Obama supported Prop 8.

PROVE IT.

Show me a link with SPECIFIC LANGUAGE about Obama supporting Prop 8.

I can deal with you like anyone else if you stick to facts of the topic.

This other BIZARRE stuff you are trying to stir up, just forget about it and try to find someone else to play with.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Jingthing

[GentlemanJim]

You want to pick a fight, dude?

I am not interested. I know your game. It's boring.

Now I provided a link showing Obama came out against Prop 8.

Now you say Obama supported Prop 8.

PROVE IT.

Show me a link with SPECIFIC LANGUAGE about Obama supporting Prop 8.

I can deal with you like anyone else if you stick to facts of the topic.

This other BIZARRE stuff you are trying to stir up, just forget about it and try to find someone else to play with.

you need help and anger management classes.

Obama does not support same sex marriages. Simple. It is all over the press what his views were in 2008. As for links, you find them because I have never seen any occasion on here when you are demanding links from the top floor of the outrage bus that you ever accept as valid. I have not seen it once, so please do not expect that effort from me on your behalf.

[Jingthing]

The issue was Prop. 8. You said Obama supported Prop. 8. He did not. I showed he did not. Remember -- Prop. 8, you specifically said before Obama supported Prop 8 and now apparently that assertion has been exposed for the falsehood that it is. That is settled.

Why is Prop 8 relevant to this thread?

Because that is the Prop that Eich supported which was the root of the controversy.

Some posters here have incorrectly asserted that Obama and Eich had the same position on Prop 8.

But, it turns out, they didn't.

If people want to act like that misleading assertion never happened about Obama and Prop 8 and talk about the TRUTHFUL statement that Obama did not support marriage equality until later, NOBODY would argue that. Of course that was his position before, but his position on PROP 8, which was a SPECIFIC and MEAN SPIRITED proposition, was AGAINST.

Again, did Eich deserve to be fired for supporting Prop 8? No, of course he didn't. He wasn't actually fired, but that's another layer of this.

Edited April 6, 2014 by Jingthing

[GentlemanJim]

The issue was Prop. 8. You said Obama supported Prop. 8. He did not. I showed he did not. Remember -- Prop. 8, you specifically said before Obama supported Prop 8 and now apparently that assertion has been exposed for the falsehood that it is. That is settled.

Why is Prop 8 relevant to this thread?

Because that is the Prop that Eich supported which was the root of the controversy.

Some posters here have incorrectly asserted that Obama and Eich had the same position on Prop 8.

But, it turns out, they didn't.

Your hero, does not support same sex marriages Jingthing. What do you think of that? I think Eich was better than Obama.

[Jingthing]

I know all about it the history with Obama. Old news. It was understood that Obama was playing politics in his first term with the issue, that he didn't want to pay the political price then to show support for marriage equality. But still, he was openly opposed to Prop. 8 which was especially mean spirited.

[Scott]

I think we can dispense with the inflammatory remarks against other posters.

[Credo]

The comparison of Eich and Obama is like comparing apples and oranges. Mozilla is a business and the person is a businessman. His resignation is a business decision. Obama is a politician, his decisions are based on politics. Both the right wing and the left wing were fully aware that most likely that any bill enhancing gay rights that crossed his desk would get signed, regardless of what he said.

The techie crowd are socially liberal. Eich wasn't going to continue to be popular with them without paying for his foible. There are still plenty of politicians who are against gay rights and gay marriage and they stay in office.

But comparing a businessman and a politician is emotive. Compare Eich with the head of Chick Filet or whatever the chain is who is anti-gay.

[chuckd]

Here is what one "Ulta" liberal seems to think about Eich's termination:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maher: "There Is A Gay Mafia -- If You Cross Them, You Do Get Whacked"

<snipped to comply with fair use>

"Well, and he gave it when President Obama was still against gay marriage. So, I don't think it's very fair," Carrie Sheffield of Forbes said.

"Good point," Maher responded.

"I think there is a gay mafia," Maher said. "I think if you cross them, you do get whacked."

Video can be seen here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2014/04/04/bill_maher_there_is_a_gay_mafia_if_you_cross_them_you_do_get_whacked.html

[Jingthing]

Yeah, I saw the Maher item.

He's not actually ultra liberal in the sense of following a consistent party line as he takes shots at all sides.

He's a COMEDIAN. Yes and he's very funny and I'm a big fan.

Nobody disputes that Obama did not support gay marriage in his first term, so, yes, good point, but it's not the same point as saying he supported Prop 8 ... because he didn't.

[Prbkk]

There is something slightly creepy about many of the leaders of these gen Y it companies and their founders. Too many zealots wanting to impose their will on others and always talking about God. They can all F*** Off and let people get on with their lives without interference.

[Jingthing]

An apt quote.

"Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard."

Mitchell Baker, Mozilla Spokesperson

[GentlemanJim]

I find it pathetic that people are trying to justify a difference between Eich and Obama. At the end of the day Eich supported something which was his right to do so. He gave a small amount of money, he even said that it was important to him to work towards a completely diverse and engaged culture within Mozilla. Obama on the other hand it seems is free to change his mind because he is a politician. He can simply say what he needs to in order to secure votes and that seems ok to the liberal Gay mafia. Obama said (and still says) he does not support same sex marriage. People like Jingthing can dress it up all they like, the fact is regardless of Prop 8 , Obama does not support same sex marriage,. Eich told the truth and conducted himself with integrity, and certain elements of the gay community feel it is ok to vilify him (in fact it seems quite a sport to some). Obama is lying, he is just playing to the crowd. He clearly does not support equality for gays, yet the liberal gays say 'he has evolved'. BS

JIngthing says (at post 105)

I know all about it the history with Obama. Old news. It was understood that Obama was playing politics in his first term with the issue, that he didn't want to pay the political price then to show support for marriage equality. But still, he was openly opposed to Prop. 8 which was especially mean spirited.

The stuff with Eich is also old news Jingthing. What you are saying here is that you accept it is ok for a politician to say what they want to get votes, and when the voters have a different opinion then the politician can say anything they like to appease the voters. In short, lying is ok. How do the extreme members of the gay community attack Eich for having his own private view and let Obama off the hook for blatant lying to accrue votes? So what is good for one is not good for the other, is that equality? Is that the equality that you are hooting and screaming for? You have no idea what equality means. You want the Orwellian equality where some are more equal than others, where nobody elses equality matters only your own. it is pathetic.

[RuamRudy]

I find it pathetic that people are trying to justify a difference between Eich and Obama. At the end of the day Eich supported something which was his right to do so. He gave a small amount of money, he even said that it was important to him to work towards a completely diverse and engaged culture within Mozilla. Obama on the other hand it seems is free to change his mind because he is a politician. He can simply say what he needs to in order to secure votes and that seems ok to the liberal Gay mafia. Obama said (and still says) he does not support same sex marriage. People like Jingthing can dress it up all they like, the fact is regardless of Prop 8 , Obama does not support same sex marriage,. Eich told the truth and conducted himself with integrity, and certain elements of the gay community feel it is ok to vilify him (in fact it seems quite a sport to some). Obama is lying, he is just playing to the crowd. He clearly does not support equality for gays, yet the liberal gays say 'he has evolved'. BS

JIngthing says (at post 105)

I know all about it the history with Obama. Old news. It was understood that Obama was playing politics in his first term with the issue, that he didn't want to pay the political price then to show support for marriage equality. But still, he was openly opposed to Prop. 8 which was especially mean spirited.

The stuff with Eich is also old news Jingthing. What you are saying here is that you accept it is ok for a politician to say what they want to get votes, and when the voters have a different opinion then the politician can say anything they like to appease the voters. In short, lying is ok. How do the extreme members of the gay community attack Eich for having his own private view and let Obama off the hook for blatant lying to accrue votes? So what is good for one is not good for the other, is that equality? Is that the equality that you are hooting and screaming for? You have no idea what equality means. You want the Orwellian equality where some are more equal than others, where nobody elses equality matters only your own. it is pathetic.

The thing is, there are many different types of browser that people could switch to. You did not have the option with Obama. Most people would agree that he is far from perfect regardless of which side of the divide you sit, but he was, for want of a better term, considered to be the lesser of two evils.

[GentlemanJim]

I find it pathetic that people are trying to justify a difference between Eich and Obama. At the end of the day Eich supported something which was his right to do so. He gave a small amount of money, he even said that it was important to him to work towards a completely diverse and engaged culture within Mozilla. Obama on the other hand it seems is free to change his mind because he is a politician. He can simply say what he needs to in order to secure votes and that seems ok to the liberal Gay mafia. Obama said (and still says) he does not support same sex marriage. People like Jingthing can dress it up all they like, the fact is regardless of Prop 8 , Obama does not support same sex marriage,. Eich told the truth and conducted himself with integrity, and certain elements of the gay community feel it is ok to vilify him (in fact it seems quite a sport to some). Obama is lying, he is just playing to the crowd. He clearly does not support equality for gays, yet the liberal gays say 'he has evolved'. BS

JIngthing says (at post 105)

I know all about it the history with Obama. Old news. It was understood that Obama was playing politics in his first term with the issue, that he didn't want to pay the political price then to show support for marriage equality. But still, he was openly opposed to Prop. 8 which was especially mean spirited.

The stuff with Eich is also old news Jingthing. What you are saying here is that you accept it is ok for a politician to say what they want to get votes, and when the voters have a different opinion then the politician can say anything they like to appease the voters. In short, lying is ok. How do the extreme members of the gay community attack Eich for having his own private view and let Obama off the hook for blatant lying to accrue votes? So what is good for one is not good for the other, is that equality? Is that the equality that you are hooting and screaming for? You have no idea what equality means. You want the Orwellian equality where some are more equal than others, where nobody elses equality matters only your own. it is pathetic.

The thing is, there are many different types of browser that people could switch to. You did not have the option with Obama. Most people would agree that he is far from perfect regardless of which side of the divide you sit, but he was, for want of a better term, considered to be the lesser of two evils.

I am not disputing that. I have no issue with Obama the President. I have issue with the gay left condoning the vilification of Eich whilst allowing their 'hero' the limitless benefit of doubt. It gives the skewed version of equality that is supposed to be cast out. It is also about time that if people believe two schmucks are running for office, the electorate do have an option in having to vote for the lesser of two evils, they can actually say, 'you know what, neither of you two are worthy of our vote, we will all go to the ballot box when two more worthy people step forward for our consideration', but that's another discussion for another thread.

The gay left as represented by certain people on this thread are condoning a strategy of attack that is light years away from their claimed goals of 'equality'. It stinks.

Edited April 7, 2014 by GentlemanJim

[Jingthing]

For the record, I have not advocated any kind of purge of public figures who do or have opposed marriage equality. Some radicals have supported that, yes, and I REALLY wish they wouldn't, but I guess that's their business. I AM of the opinion that opposing marriage equality is a bigoted position even if "rationalized" by religious dogma. That is only my opinion, many people do share it, but I do not represent "the gays" or "American gays" but only my opinion. So yes if you like I would agree at one point Obama was supporting a bigoted position on marriage equality (but specifically NOT Prop 8 which was particularly mean spirited), but politics being politics, I can say with a lot of confidence that most gay Americans believed he was only doing that as a political game and that turned out to be true. Let's get real -- he was telegraphing that in obvious ways when communicating with gay political groups, it didn't take a psychic to figure it out. Some may say Obama's eventual transformation into the most powerful gay civil rights HERO in American history is just a political game too ... you've got the right to think whatever you like, but I don't think that, I think Obama's pro equality stance reflects the REAL inner Obama. I guess that question is one for the history books. We're too close to it now.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

Another detail about Prop 8, it was not just a statement against gay marriage equality, passing it actually made thousands of gay Californians who were ALREADY married not married. So it was an active act of discrimination, stripping away EXISTING rights. Also at that time, STATE gay marriages were not anything even close to actual marriage equality as they were not recognized FEDERALLY. Now, thanks the to supreme court decision and Obama actively pushing various government bodies to live up that ruling, state gay marriages are federally recognized and are largely really EQUAL.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

Another detail about Prop 8, it was not just a statement against gay marriage equality, passing it actually made thousands of gay Californians who were ALREADY married not married. So it was an active act of discrimination, stripping away EXISTING rights. Also at that time, STATE gay marriages were not anything even close to actual marriage equality as they were not recognized FEDERALLY. Now, thanks the to supreme court decision and Obama actively pushing various government bodies to live up that ruling, state gay marriages are federally recognized and are largely really EQUAL.

" state gay marriages are federally recognized and are largely really EQUAL."

So what's the big deal about what some guy did with $1,000 of his own money some six years ago?

[Jingthing]

I didn't make the big deal. I'm just commenting on a news story which is a big deal in the U.S. now.

Let's get real here.

There is no 100 percent free speech in hiring (and firing) of very high profile figures in the U.S. and almost everyone is OK with that.

There are abstract perfect ideals and then there is the actual social reality on the ground. They are never exactly the same.

RIGHT now:

A CEO is found to have contributed to a Holocaust Denial group/Nazis, etc.

He's gone! No question about it.

If known before, he would never be hired.

RIGHT now:

A CEO is found to have contributed to the KKK or really any kind of blatantly racist action (or even speech, sometimes even revealed PRIVATE speech) in his past.

He's gone! No question about it.

If known before, he would never be hired.

RIGHT now:

Generally anti-gay civil rights speech, actions, or contributions are not NEARLY at the same level as those examples above. The vast majority of Americans are OK with the two above examples being our social realities. It would not apply to low profile people, but LEADERS, yes it does NOW.

The gay civil rights issue is still a work in progress, in transition.

Maybe being anti-gay equal rights will never reach the level of the above examples. Right now, it is not, So that's where we're at now.

I probably agree with right wingers that gay people PUSHING that social change by any kind of perceived "force" will only cause backlash upon the gay civil rights movement. Perhaps over time NATURALLY anti-gay actions will be seen widely as just simply unacceptable in any leader as racism and antisemitism. But that kind of social change can't be pushed. It either happens or it doesn't. It will probably move in that direction at least gradually over time ... NATURALLY.

Ask Paula Dean about it.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Jingthing

[Ulysses G.]

Gay activists in American have been able to convince many people that objecting to the word "marriage" being used for same sex couples is somehow "anti-gay", but that is not the case everywhere.

Perhaps as many as a million people marched in Paris last Sunday and at French embassies around the world against proposed legislation that would legalize same-sex marriage in France. One of the surprises in the French campaign for traditional marriage is that homosexuals have joined pro-family leaders and activists in the effort.

http://c-fam.org/en/issues/human-rights-system/2050-french-homosexuals-join-demonstration-against-gay-marriage

[Jingthing]

It's not only about a word but about equal civil rights even if using a different word. There never existed a realistic path in the USA for same sex relationship equally without marriage. Also cultures do vary.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[RuamRudy]

Gay activists in American have been able to convince many people that objecting to the word "marriage" being used for same sex couples is somehow "anti-gay", but that is not the case everywhere.

Perhaps as many as a million people marched in Paris last Sunday and at French embassies around the world against proposed legislation that would legalize same-sex marriage in France. One of the surprises in the French campaign for traditional marriage is that homosexuals have joined pro-family leaders and activists in the effort.

http://c-fam.org/en/issues/human-rights-system/2050-french-homosexuals-join-demonstration-against-gay-marriage

Just what is it about homosexuals being recognised in a formal marriage that some people object to? In what way, shape or form does it impact the rest of the world?