Earlier in the week it was reported that three of of Mozilla’s (the people who make the Firefox browser) board members resigned when Mozilla co-founder, Brendan Eich, was appointed as CEO of the company. Why? Because Eich gave $1,000 to support California’s Proposition 8 in 2008, a ballot initiative that sought to define marriage as an institution exclusive to male-female pairings. His appointment as CEO so irked the dating site, OkCupid, that users attempting to login to the site received this message: “Hello there, Mozilla Firefox user. Pardon this interruption of your OkCupid experience. Mozilla’s new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay couples. We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to access OkCupid.”
Now, it’s being reported that Eich has “resigned.” Surely he wasn’t tired of the job yet.
Thinking to Believe 
April 4, 2014 at 11:34 am
Jason, I heard that on the Brian Sussman show – KSFO radio on Wednesday……..makes me SO MAD how whiney & INTOLERANT the homosexual perverts are. Their agenda is like a cancer, creeping into every sector of society.
By the way, now Bruce Jenner wants to change his gender (no lie)…..maybe then he can marry Chaz Bono?……can’t be any worse than being married to horrible Kris (Kardashian) Jenner.
God bless you! Elaine PS. Jonathan says HI!
________________________________
LikeLike
April 4, 2014 at 1:27 pm
I found one example of uproar thus far: Andrew Sullivan. Sullivan is a gay man, which makes his roar all the more meaningful. See http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/04/03/the-hounding-of-brendan-eich/
LikeLike
April 4, 2014 at 3:29 pm
Orwell’s “Animal Farm” lives on.
LikeLiked by 1 person
April 4, 2014 at 4:35 pm
But was he sacked, or did he resign? The difference between these isn’t great if he had to bear all that ostracism anyway, but it carries a fair amount of clout on the debating table. One could say that if he resigned, he left out of choice and that this was not therefore an act of discrimination. But as long as it’s evident that he resigned because the existing discrimination against him was so bad that he couldn’t bear it, he can could still be regarded as a would-be martyr among his sympathisers, even if his opponents wouldn’t buy it. Martyr-status sort of buffers sympathisers from being further shamed into conformity by the spectacle that has made out of him – furthermore, the liberal lobby cannot tastefully catastrophize about ‘what will become our the internet’ and lick its wounds now (since Firefox has disgraced itself beyond repair we can unhypocritically occupy the role of ‘marginalized oppressed’ in the metadebate instead, and strategically it’s the best role you can have). What’s more, other websites no longer have a perceived license to do as that dating site did because the guy’s gone, which could have led to something quite frightening if the situation had escalated. I’d say that resigning was the best move this guy could have made for the sake of his cause. It’s not inconceivable, coming from a guy who donated $1000 to it. I’m not usually this cynical, but many of the people in this debate aren’t in it because they care about the cause; they’re in it because it’s just another power game they want to win . That’s not where I’m at by any means, but it’s very different to look at it that way.
LikeLike
April 5, 2014 at 10:31 am
Any CEO of a public entity such Mozilla would already be alienating a sizeable portion of the human race by his position of “being against” certain members of the society. Incidentally the Post says that three Board Members resigned when Brendan Eich was appointed CEO of Mozilla; it is worth noting that the Entire Board of Mozill resigned as the Board consists ONLY of three Members: Board of Directors. Mitchell Baker, Chair; Reid Hoffman; Katharina Borchert. The Mozilla Corporation senior executive team is known as the Steering Committee.
Tony Starnes is asking questions about anti-gays in the same way that Uganda and other countries have asked and demanded and now operate against equal rights for sexual oriented gay people. “Why not demand that those who oppose gay marriage relinquish the right to own property? Why not take away their right to vote? Why not take away their children? Why not just throw them in jail? Why not force them to work in chain gangs? Why not call for public floggings? Or better yet, let’s just strap them down on gurneys, stick a needle in their arm and rid the world of these intolerant anti-gay bigots once and for all.”
These questions are most stupid questions; not only because they are Barbaric but because they are advocating the same stupidity that anyone who has followed the news in Uganda knows; and, Uganda’s recent laws against Gays have been encouraged by anti gay activists from….where else? The United States of America and Britain!: If there is anything on the face of this earth that is a threat to civilization it is religious insanity in the name of a villainous Caricature God who religionists claims has created all babies, including gay babies delivered from the womb, I hasten to add, in his image but obviously not in the same image of the self righteous religious among us.
The Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2014 (previously called the “Kill the Gays bill” in the media due to the originally proposed death penalty clauses) was passed by the Parliament of Uganda on 20 December 2013 with the death penalty proposal dropped in favour of life in prison. The bill was signed into law by the President of Uganda on 24 February 2014.
“If you are a homo and you are destroying our society, you should be stopped,” said lawmaker DAVID BAHATI, author of the bill that had initially sought the death penalty for those considered the worst offenders when he introduced it in 2009.
According to a reporter in Africa, “Africans see homosexuality as being both un-African and un-Christian”. Thirty-eight of fifty-three African nations criminalise homosexuality in some way. In sub-Saharan Africa, the government of South Africa and of Namibia are the only official entities to support LGBT rights, but even there curative rape is used against men and women, such as in the murder of Eudy Simelane, and sometimes met with police inaction and apathy. Like the conditions in many other African nations, gays in Uganda currently face an atmosphere of physical abuse, vandalism to their property, blackmail, death threats, and “correctional rape”.
From 5 to 8 March 2009, a workshop took place in Kampala, the capital of Uganda, that featured three American evangelical Christians: SCOTT LIVELY, an author who has written several books opposing homosexuality; CALEB LEE BRUNDIDGE, a self-professed former gay man who conducts sessions to heal homosexuality; and DON SCHMIERER, a board member of Exodus International, an organisation devoted to promoting “freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ”. The theme of the conference, according to The New York Times, was the “gay agenda”: “how to make gay people straight, how gay men often sodomized teenage boys and how ‘the gay movement is an evil institution’ whose goal is ‘to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity’ “. An Anglican priest from Zambia named KAPYA KAOMA was in attendance, and reported on the conference. Ugandan STEPHEN LANGA organised it, and was supported by LIVELY, who asserted in his workshops that homosexuality was akin to child molestation and bestiality, and causes higher rates of divorce and HIV transmission. LLIVELY’S emphasis was on the cohesion of the African family, that he said was being threatened by “homosexuals looking to recruit youth into their ranks”. According to KAOMA, during the conference, one of the thousands of Ugandans in attendance announced, “[The parliament] feels it is necessary to draft a new law that deals comprehensively with the issue of homosexuality and…takes into account the international gay agenda… Right now there is a proposal that a new law be drafted.”
The Bill, the Government of Uganda, and the Evangelicals involved have received significant international media attention as well as criticism and condemnation from many Western governments and those of other countries, some of whom have threatened to cut off financial aid to Uganda. The Bill has also received protests from international LGBT, human rights, civil rights, and scientific organisations. In response to the attention, a revision was introduced to reduce the strongest penalties for the greatest offences (FROM DEATH) to life imprisonment. Intense international reaction to the bill, with many media outlets characterising it as barbaric and abhorrent, caused President Yoweri Museveni to form a commission to investigate the implications of passing it. The bill was held for further discussion for most of 2010. In May 2011, parliament adjourned without voting on the bill; in October 2011 debate was re-opened. Bahati re-introduced the bill in February 2012.
In November 2012, Uganda agreed to pass a new law against homosexuality by the end of 2012 as a “Christmas gift” to its advocates, according to the speaker of parliament. On December 31st 2012 a number of events took place across Uganda where main stream churches and Evangelical Pastors united to condemn homosexuality and call for the passage of the Bill, saying passing the Bill would save the nation’s children from being recruited into the vice. Among those in attendance was UK based evangelical preacher PAUL SHINNERS who commended Uganda for the Bill, saying it was a clear stand for God. He said, “There is no other nation world over that has such a plan and through this, Uganda is going to be blessed.” Although the death penalty was originally planned to be included in the bill, the Legal Affairs Committee has reported verbally that there is the recommendation to drop the death penalty. The final version did not include the death penalty, but the passage has been seen by many as a green light for anti-gay violence from both the public and the police. There have been a number of beatings and murders since the bill was passed and subsequently signed by the Ugandan President.
TONY STARNES advocates these exact kinds of things that some countries currently do to gay people in their communities by asking his ludicrous questions; “…..cannot own property, cannot vote, cannot have children, are thrown in jail, are publically flooged, are crucified(figuratively) and executed, with a view to rid the world of gays once and for all”.
REFERENCE: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/09/us-uganda-gays-idUSBREA2806420140309
LikeLike
April 5, 2014 at 10:38 am
CORRECTION:
According to a report on the Wall Street Journal Gary Kovacks, John Lilly, and Ellen Siminoff have resigned from their board positions leaving Mitchell Baker; Reid Hoffman and Katharina Borchert on the board.
Gary Kovacs is a former Mozilla CEO and currently is in charge of AVG Technologies, while John Lilly is also a former Mozilla CEO and currently a partner at venture-capital firm Greylock Partners. Ellen Siminoff is the CEO of online education startup Shmoop.
The Six Member Board is left with: Mitchell Baker, Chair; Reid Hoffman; Katharina Borchert.
LikeLike
April 5, 2014 at 6:02 pm
Does anyone actually look at the picture of the x-CEO and think “Heterosexual”?….. More like “Self-Hating Closet Case Gay!!!”
LikeLike
April 6, 2014 at 11:15 am
cpmondello:
I am surprised that your comment is merely a useless ad hominem. When somebody has nothing to say, and you have nothing to say except, “Self-Hating Closet Case Gay!!!” Why bother?
LikeLike
April 6, 2014 at 12:48 pm
The full teachings of Christ have been in the public arena for some two thousand years now. It’s called the Sermon on the Mount and it can be found in its entirety in Chapters 5, 6 & 7 of the Gospel account of Matthew. Here’s a newsflash for those who haven’t read it or haven’t read it with clarity of comprehension: homosexuals & homosexuality are nowhere mentioned. The topic is not spoken of.
Some of what Christ does say is this:
“Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.” (MATTHEW 7:1, 2)
“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” (MATTHEW 7:12)
“A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.” (MATTHEW 7:18, 20)
“Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. And everyone that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.” (MATTHEW 7:24-27)
The reality remains: we live in a fallen world. If you want proof then read the newspapers. Every society on the planet has its share of narcissistic crack-pots, half-wits and manipulative hypocrites seeking to promote their own self-styled agendas.
Take heed that no one deceive you. If you’re looking to learn what Christ or being Christ-like is truly about you must go to the Source: the Word of God. And get the whole story.
“And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying, Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.” (MATTHEW 5:1, 2, 6)
LikeLike
April 6, 2014 at 6:00 pm
Frank:
I’m impressed; putting Jesus first regarding what “he said” is tres important and your comments supporting what he said, I agree.
LikeLike
April 12, 2014 at 4:38 pm
Frank,
You wrote, “Here’s a newsflash for those who haven’t read it or haven’t read it with clarity of comprehension: homosexuals & homosexuality are nowhere mentioned. The topic is not spoken of.” What exactly is your argument here? And what does it have to do with the topic of how Eich was treated?
Jason
LikeLike
April 26, 2014 at 5:28 pm
More support for Eich from LGBT community:. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/22/freedom_to_marry_freedom_to_dissent_why_we_must_have_both_122376.html
LikeLike
April 26, 2014 at 7:43 pm
Jason:
Good Post:
Agreed: the balance of diversity through “free speech” must be defended keeping in mind that “discretion” is key.
“Is opposition to same-sex marriage by itself, expressed in a political campaign, beyond the pale of tolerable discourse in a free society? We cannot wish away the objections of Christian, Jewish, and Muslim faith traditions, or browbeat them into submission. Even in our constitutional system, persuasion is a minority’s first and best strategy. It has served us well and we should not be done with it.
Free Speech Is a Value, Not Just a Law
Much of the rhetoric that emerged in the wake of the Eich incident showed a worrisome turn toward intolerance and puritanism among some supporters of gay equality—not in terms of formal legal sanction, to be sure, but in terms of abandonment of the core liberal values of debate and diversity.”
Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/04/22/freedom_to_marry_freedom_to_dissent_why_we_must_have_both_122376.html#ixzz30375RcEP
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
LikeLike