Friday, April 4, 2014

Mozilla and Fascism?

Mozilla's CEO is out because he opposes same-sex marriage.  HERE is the article, please check it out.  It's fascinating, disturbing, and shows who the true fascists are, and I don't use that term lightly.
Here's the crux of the article:

Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich resigned under pressure after gay rights activists demanded that he step down or recant his support of traditional marriage laws. Eich donated $1,000 to support Proposition 8, the California ballot initiative that amended the state's constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman. "I don't want to talk about my personal beliefs because I kept them out of Mozilla all these 15 years we've been going,” Eich told The Guardian. “I don't believe they're relevant.” That wasn't an option. "CEO Brendan Eich should make an unequivocal statement of support for marriage equality," a Credoaction petition signed by almost 75,000 people said, per The Inquirer. "If he cannot, he should resign. And if he will not, the board should fire him immediately." When asked if his beliefs about marriage should constitute a firing offense the way racism or sexism does, Eich argued that these religious beliefs — and beliefs popular as of 2008 — should not be used as a basis for dismissal. "I don't believe that's true, on the basis of what's permissible to support or vote on in 2008," he told CNET. "It's still permissible. Beliefs that are protected, that include political and religious speech, are generally not something that can be held against even a CEO..."

What do we do about this?   It says so much about what used to be freedom in America.   Please chime in.   This is forcible suppression of opposition..... This is someone not allowed to disagree, to have his own opinion.  Both of those are part of the definition of Fascism.

Should he go now?  Could he fight?  What do you think?  Wouldn't EVERYBODY on the Supreme Court be on the side of someone who has every right (or did, before the Lefties brought us to this point) to have his own feelings none of which in any way change his excellent company leadership?

Z  (thanks to Imp for alerting me to this article!)

67 comments:

Always On Watch said...

Isn't this kind of thing a violation of Eich's Constitutional rights?

In the man's 15-year history as the CEO of Mozilla, he did his job correctly and efficiently.

Always On Watch said...

Too back that Mr. Eich cannot take back JavaScript, upon which all of us on the web depend!

Ed Bonderenka said...

Another example of liberal tolerance

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Of course he shouldn't have been pressured to resign. But he could have also had the courage of his convictions and fought to stay.

Tolerance of course is on a sliding scale. This might well be satire of 'liberal tolerance', but the use of legislation to deny equal rights and privileges under the law would be the same of 'conservative tolerance'.

jez said...

Not sure that fascism is the right word for this. In a free state, are customers allowed to boycott a product on ethical grounds? Are companies not allowed to respond to that boycott?

The Debonair Dudes World said...

Brendan Eich’s personal liberties, and competence couldn’t survive the hate, and the pitch forks and the threats from the so called “Tolerant Left”... how many times have we seen this before? To many times to list! .
Clearly this is another case of Chick-Fil-A and or Duck Dynasty!
Brendan clearly has more sense in his little pinky than the Moron’s on the left have collectively. But still, this is one of the saddest days in America -- a nation founded on religious liberty, a nation that has fought to protect the civil liberties of its citizens from encroachment by the state or abuse by employers, landlords and other institutions. It now seems that anyone can be punished for his or her religious, moral or political beliefs by well-funded mobs that can exert economic pressure on one’s employer. These are the tactics of closed societies behind the Iron Curtain.. not the shining city on the hill.
This is a glimpse into our future! This is about what you progressive idiots in the Tolerant Left wanted! This is all about the Culture of Intolerance! If this was a Muslim or a Black the outcome would have been entirely different. I’m just sick and tired of persecuting people in the work place for their personal beliefs. I don't like the idea of this one bit!
This is NOT about gay marriage and religion. This is about of Socialist rule in the United States of America where we are supposed to have Freedom of Speech.. This smells of another hack job from the douchebager’s Left Wingers stupidity in action.

Yes, people are free to boycott products based on their personal feelings, but more importantly people are free to donate to whatever cause they want to! You make think that it’s a controversial donation, but he still has the right to make that donation.
That is just the context in which this latest abuse has come to be. It is about the freedom of speech, or the lack of it --not because of anything you did or didn’t do at your job, but because of something you did in your personal life. Something religious. Or maybe, something political or something that is nonsense in your personal in your life . This is further proof that this country is headed straight into the toilet. When will we have finally have enough of this kind of abuses from the progressives?

The American Conservative said...

Eich Is Out. So is Freedom, and so is Liberty, and so is Freedom of speech!So Is Tolerance

The Lefties are coming out from under their rocks.

Sam Huntington said...

Renounce your beliefs, and agree with us, or else ... seems consistent with everything we know about the political left. But the article states, “... Brendan Eich resigned under pressure after gay rights activists demanded that he step down or recant his support of traditional marriage laws.”

Does Eich lack the courage of his convictions? What kind of pressure can people really place on the CEO of a company he started? Did they threaten to beat him up? What pressure?

Always On Watch said...

Does anyone here have the answers to Sam's questions?

Fred Baron said...

This is a variation of 'slut shaming,' a phenomenon decried by the left when aimed at women acting, well... like a slut!

But doing it to nonconformists and people who refuse to be absorbed into the borg is laudable, and it protects the hive.

Not much we can do about it. This progressive beast will eventually destroy itself when the special groups and their special rights begin conflicting with one another.

Always On Watch said...

Get this!

IRS Responsible For Leaking Mozilla CEO’s Prop 8 Donation To Pro-Gay Liberal Group

Always On Watch said...

Excerpt from the link that I left above:

Eich made a $1,000 donation to the campaign urging a ‘yes’ vote on California’s Proposition 8. When this fact first came to light in 2012, after the Internal Revenue Service leaked a copy of the National Organization for Marriage’s 2008 tax return to a gay-advocacy group, Eich, who was then CTO of Mozilla, published a post on his personal blog stating that his donation was not motivated by any sort of animosity towards gays or lesbians, and challenging those who did not believe this to cite any “incident where I displayed hatred, or ever treated someone less than respectfully because of group affinity or individual identity.”

Thersites said...

The gay mafia strikes again!

Mustang said...

Will Eich have the courage to bring a lawsuit against the IRS for leaking personal information? If not, then I don't have much sympathy for him.

CnC said...

If it is true that Obamas IRS goons leaked this info then that is the real story here. And the real danger.

Impertinent said...

Ummmmmm....just though I'd mention this...MLK was killed on this date, 46 years ago.

Too bad a majority of his accomplishments and recommendations have been forgotten.

Impertinent said...

@Thersites:

"The gay mafia strikes again.."

No...the mafia never stifled free speech. They may have had a strict code of Omerta...

But I think these animals are more like a gay Gestapo:

A police organization that employs terroristic methods to control a populace.

And they are "policing" the speech codes as well as religious beliefs and affiliations.

Their intolerance and hate are made of the same stuff as the Gestapo.

Lisa said...

every time these so called "feminists" decry conservatism they prove how diverse they are not. I don't' think half of them even understand conservatism, They are just led to believe to that anyone who isn't pro gay marriage or pro abortion are hateful,anti-woman bigoted racists.
Group think is a dangerous thing.

Woodsterman (Odie) said...

I refuse to reward stupid, so I'll be switching browsers ... ta ta.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Cries of "fascism" [however erroneously employed] and "gestapo" are quite ironic, given that they're not employed against groups on the right who do the same thing.

Always On Watch said...

Have we all seen this?

"Fun Fact: When Former Mozilla CEO Donated To Prop 8 Group Both Obama And Biden Were Opposed To Gay Marriage"

Sam Huntington said...

@ CI

I wonder if you would elaborate on your point. Could you tell me any instance when the IRS leaked taxpayer information to a pro-marriage group, and as a consequence to this, a CEO was pressured to resign by conservative groups?

Thanks

Constitutional Insurgent said...

I'm not referring to the IRS allegation. That is seperate (and egregious) from the initial responses.

Impertinent said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Impertinent said...

@CI:

Go ahead...point out and tell us who the "right" gestapo is then.

And don't give me the westboro loons either.

If these tactics don't disgust and make you fear for your rights, or your job / career...that can happen to any of us..I don't know what to say.

Impertinent said...

When anyone removes their FireFox...they ask why during the uninstall....tell them the truth that they're,

Cowardly fascists.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

One Million Moms and FRC are just two who use the same tactics as your "gestapo". Those who advocate legislation to deprive their fellow citizen either the right to engage in consenual activity....or to deny the privileges and protections that they enjoy themselves........is just as "tolerant" as you decry of others. Supporting liberty and freedom doesn't mean restricting it to the like minded. That would be groupthink.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

To clarify.....I do not support efforts to demand removal of a companys CEO due to ideological differences. I don't support it when any group engages in this sort of activity.

Duckys here said...

Regarding the supposed IRS leak

... but why wait till the facts are out when rabies media can work the right to a froth.

Duckys here said...

I get a laugh out of Ed, Debonair Dude and others talking about tolerance in a matter of gay marriage.
They sure do bellow when its their ox getting gored.

This all seems a bit odd. He resigned due to a petition? Didn't take much of a push.
Its a shame that Focus on the Family and other bastions of tolerance don't have this kind of juice, right Dude?

Gays have learned (unlike other groups on the left) that they have to keep pounding. That's the only way they prevail.
If they had not stayed public and gained considerable public sympathy, President Toonces would never have caved.

His resignation is his own decision but it's his decision.
None of the posters here (with the probable exception of CI) would have objected to discrimination against gays and now that their privilege is being challenged they get hysterical.

If the poor and others learn to effectively use these methods then I can hear your bellowing for protection by the police state.

Duckys here said...

@Lisa -- I don't' think half of them even understand conservatism ...
---
You mean the Rand Paul brand that said it should be legal to deny minorities restaurant service?

Exactly what form of conservatism are you referring to?

Because the current brand is insane and causing great harm.

Z said...

Oh, dear!

From the bottom of Ducky's linked article:

"The IRS is accused of leaking the National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) tax
records from 2008 to the Human Rights Campaign. The IRS has
claimed the release of the records were “inadvertent.” The records included names of donors to NOM, but while NOM was responsible for organizing and pushing forward Proposition 8 it’s not the same list. Eich donated to Prop. 8, not to NOM. Eich’s name and donation
to Proposition 8 was always a public record and searchable even
before the election. People were facing public criticism for their
donations at their workplaces even at the time of the vote. Eich is not the first guy to deal with this sort of backlash, and it prompted debate over whether names of donors should be public. (Z: a well known actor and friend of mine had this happen to him, as well....published in the LA Times, getting unbelievable hate mail for his not agreeing with most actors)

We can blame a multitude of sins on the IRS and President Barack
Obama, but the outrage over Eich is not one of them."

So, outrage that this guy's leaving due to pressure isn't an OUTRAGE? hmmm

Notice how when Obama says something awful it's excused as "inartful"? The IRS is "inadvertent".
I hope and pray the Right would someday get that treatment, don't you?

Z said...

Imp; could you give those of us who need it a primer on how to change from FireFox to something else?

Impertinent said...

@Z:

For anyone that wants to delete , uninstall or trash ( Mac's ) FireFox there are viable and good replacements.

Safari is an excellent browser, Chrome, there's Opera too. All free. When you uninstall Firefox it's asks you why you're leaving...tell them. They're cowards, bigots and fascists.

Z said...

Ed, thanks for that 'example of lib tolerance'
I SO applaud those young conservatives for having the guts just to ask questions. They weren't offensive, they weren't challenging.
But, my goodness, be a woman with a different point of view, and you're not a woman.
Be a Black man with a different point of view, you're really not Black.

This is what the left stands for and is doing our country 'such harm'.

It's almost as silly as honestly believing Paul Ryan believes Blacks should be turned away from service.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/05/republicans-oppose-right-to-refuse-service-to-gays-white-evangelicals-narrowly-support-it/

Z said...

Imp; I don't need the philosophy behind it, but thanks.
I asked for HOW.
I'll call my computer guru.
Thanks.

Impertinent said...

@Z:


Oh...you should install the new browser before removing Firefox too. That way the new one will ask to import your bookmarks and favorites.

Once you successfully do that...try it out and uninstall FireFox from the Windows Control panels "add & remove" programs.

On a Mac....just drag the whole application into your trash bin.

Impertinent said...

@Z:


I just did....from the Control Panel... add & remove programs in windows.
Are we getting testy? LOL

Always On Watch said...

Duck,
I'm not sure that Before It's News is a site of credibility. Just sayin'.

Always On Watch said...

Also from the link that Duck left:

The possible IRS leak is a real thing, though. First Things
didn’t invent it, just misunderstood it.

Thersites said...

"The IRS is accused of leaking the National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) tax records from 2008 to the Human Rights Campaign. The IRS has claimed the release of the records were “inadvertent.”

Gay "Superheroes", to the rescue... Just more "Batman Justice" of Liberalism.

Always On Watch said...

Ed,
I just watched that video to which you linked in your comment above and will be posting that video at my blog site next week.

Lisa said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lisa said...

Ducky the only insanity ever revealed is on the left. See OWS and ACORN storming people's private homes.

You took that whole Rand Paul comment out of context of course.
What he said is when you start using laws against business owners it becomes so broad that it opens the door for all kinds of frivolous law suits. Don't you see how frivolous law suite run rampant through our society now?
Nobody is going to deny someone the right to come in their business based on ethnicity.
But if a coupLe of hoodie wearing black thugs come in and start acting obnoxious and looking suspicious(because they never do) and you you ask them to leave they are going to use the same old tired racist card.
Same goes for white thugs but the difference is they would not be able to play the race card so is it fair to the white people who are asked to leave for acting obnoxious that they can't press charges?

Ed Bonderenka said...

Ducky and CI can believe all they want that a society "endorsing" homosexual activity is a good thing.
All they are basing it on is either personal preference or some abstract notion of unfettered liberty.
Not good for kids, not stable for society.
Like drug use.
Unfortunately this is a real nation they want to experiment on.
With real consequences.

Duckys here said...

No Ed, I base it on a rejection of the fundamentalist, Abrahamic belief that religion has a primary purpose to control sexuality.

Pure foolishness.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Ed - We will certainly disagree my friend. Individual liberty should not be curtailed based on a society's collective 'feelings' or emotional state [which has been shifting anyway ever since the 'traditional' lobby has failed to show rational basis in the various courts].

For every 'study' showing the possibility that these relationships are not as stable for children....there is a study that shows no perceptible difference.

With liberty comes risk....and I welcome it.

Sam Huntington said...

No Ducky, pure foolishness is thinking that homosexual behavior is part of human sexuality. It is not. It has always been, and continues to be, depravity. You reveal yourself as a very stupid man.

Impertinent said...

@CI:

You're willing to risk the well being of children?

And it's dependent on who's doing your study, assuming it's unbiassed and objective...which I doubt.

Z said...

Imp! I DID SOUND TESTY! I felt really badly later...I'm so sorry! I DO get testy over computer stuff (as you know)
Thanks for taking it so well..I laughed at your totally appropriate question, I have to admit.
Yes, I AMMMMMMM!!!
I love that you said to install the other one first...that makes sense. Now how to figure out how the HELL to do ANY of it! :-)

ED. What an excellent comment. SO MANY of us don't see things as clearly as your comment. THanks for that.

Thersites...gay superheroes. Just what our country needs, right?

Ducky: This is a new one "Abrahamic belief that religion has a primary purpose to control sexuality."
Are you KIDDING? The primary purpose...really? WHO KNEW??
:=)



Ed Bonderenka said...

Z: I second that response to Lucky.
Primary purpose of "Abrahamic belief is to reveal God.
All studies show a higher rate of sexual satisfaction among Christian women.

Thersites said...

Thersites...gay superheroes. Just what our country needs, right?

If the Law can't provide "social justice," then it's up to responsible Liberals to step in and fill the gap!

Now if only we convince our bretheren at the IRS to shut down Conservative and Tea Party 501c's... ;)

Thersites said...

...Lest some Bible Thumper's succeed in controlling our "sexuality"!

We must all be given ample opportunity to establish a "socially just" gender identity!

Z said...

http://news.yahoo.com/australias-top-court-recognises-gender-neutral-sex-category-004428333.html

THERSITES....there you go!
The perfect solution to libertarians and liberals who just wish we could all be the same ....or something.
Odd you brought this up; I'd seen it and emailed it to Kid yesterday so I was locked and loaded!

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Imp - "You're willing to risk the well being of children?"

Given that the 'risk' s based on studies just as accurate or dubious as you would characterize the oppositions.....and the already prevalent [and i would argue more harmful] risk of single parent, out of wedlock or abusive households...yes. I would certainly choose two loving parents and the increased protection of individual liberty. Every time.

"And it's dependent on who's doing your study, assuming it's unbiassed and objective...which I doubt."

And exactly the same assertion can be made for studies you might rely upon.

Robert Sinclair said...

I notice that the fruit who plays Spiderman in the movies is pushing children toward the queer agenda. Is that what we think normal and respectable is today? Has anyone seen a clearer example of sexually brainwashing children? Why is that not “child abuse?”

Z said...

Robert...what's happening with Spiderman? Can you give me a short synopsis?

TO ALL:

It's been the norm for a mom and a dad to raise children. One female, one male....it worked pretty well for approximately 2000 years.
Is it unkind to suggest it might still work the best though there are studies that show children of same sex parents make out just fine and children of straight parents might be screwed up by the parents or their divorce?

I'm thinking there is a 'best possible scenario' and it's scary when that's somehow denied or we must (MUST) buy into feeling shamed and mean for suggesting it. Obviously, clearly, this doesn't mean we have a problem with gay friends, etc. As a matter of fact, I've had gay friends in the past who don't agree with gay marriage or raising children in gay homes. Are they biased? Are they shameful? I don't think so.

when people bring up divorce amount straight parents "Well, how can you guarantee children will thrive in a straight household?" it's a totally legitimate question.

Oh, well........the fact that we are questioning this very basis/foundation of society also seems fair to me, and inventing (see my link) new sexual terminology for...some people......that's not boding well for us. Not at all, in my opinion.

Impertinent said...

@CI:

I wasn't implying "your" study as in one you rely on or preferred. It was meant in the context of generally your studies... as in varying ones you might rely on as in pro or con.

So you don't have to get YOUR ...yes YOUR boxers in a knot. OK. Man you do this all the time.

Robert Sinclair said...

@ Z

Andrew Garfield, the actor playing Spiderman (a film directed at children) wants his character to be gay.

Ed Bonderenka said...

The CEO of "Firefox" supported straight marriage the same way Barak (spit) Obama and Joe (spit) Biden did.
He lost his job because of it.
They should lose theirs.

Impertinent said...

@ED:

"He lost his job because of it.
They should lose theirs..."



Yep...both these kumquats constantly nag and whine about "fairness" and feelings and a fairer playing field....a fairer income. If they believed their own bull shit in a "Fair" world...they should resign too.

Baysider said...

I notice Mozilla issued a statement supporting 'free speech and equality' with GLAAD echoing that it shows where corporate America is inclusive, safe and welcoming to all.

Is it possible to be any less self-aware? And do pigs fly now?

Z said...

Robert Sinclair..'Why can't we explore that the character's GAY?!" For KIDS? WHY?
What is the BIG DEAL about GAY suddenly?
Let's all respect them, wish them ALL the best...etc.?
I'll bet most dignified gays would be on our side on this one.
This is totally disgusting and we are not complaining enough.

But, you see...the left will say (and not ALL on the left, I think some haven't lost their minds...yet), "But you're so close minded....OPEN your minds to homosexuality, then we'll have TOTAL EQUALITY soon!"
RUBBISH.
And, pardon my language, but "Damn it, why not honor OUR opinions, too? We don't wish anybody harm and we have every RIGHT to our opinions without being SHAMED by jerks with a different agenda." RIGHT?

Baysider...they're flying now :-)

Ed, yes, but Barack and Joe finally acquiesced to the gay agenda, so THEY'RE COOOOOL :-)

Imp; right

Bob said...

@Ducky: "His resignation is his own decision but it's his decision."

Probably not, Ducky. He only recently assumed his position, so everything was up to the Board of Directors. With headquarters in Mountain View, California, the board members are probably as wide-eyed liberal as you will find, anywhere. Plus, they are not a large company and with the public pressure, unreasonable as it was, they felt they had to react to defend their future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation

That's my speculation. Like many here, I would have thought that such donations should have been private.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

Imp - "So you don't have to get YOUR ...yes YOUR boxers in a knot. OK. Man you do this all the time."

What in the hell are you talking about? You referenced the efficacy of studies that would support my stated position. I rebutted with the fact that the efficacy is the same as those that support your stated position.

I'm not sure why you might take it personally.

Always On Watch said...

Z,
You might be interested in reading THIS: Much of the shock following the removal of Brendan Eich from the position of Mozilla CEO came from the realization that, in a manner of speaking, America was now at war. True it’s a culture war, not a physical conflict. But if you were waiting for the moment when the Cold Civil War actually begins, this might be it....

Much more at the above link.

Always On Watch said...

Two more paragraphs from the above link:

The removal of Eich is about fascism. It’s about one group of people forcing everyone else to bow to their hat on a pole; it s about book burning, compelling obeisance to, as Jame Surowiecki put it, “a universal ideology” in a manner so bald that even those who might gain politically in the short term from it are horrified by its crudity.

Perceptive gays understand now, if they hadn’t noticed before, that a whole mechanism now exists for persecuting people whose views are deemed unacceptable. Today it is directed against Eich; once it was directed against Summers; on other occasions it was employed against Clarence Thomas. But sooner or later, probably sooner, they understand it will be directed against them — or us — or someone. And if it can get a corporate CEO who is widely regarded as the father of Javascript it can get pretty darned anyone.