Mozilla CEO resigns after donation to Prop 8

Superfreak said:
Thanks for proving once again you are a fake libertarian.
Click to expand...

As are most on-line libertarians. Their numbers seems to be legion on-line, yet in actual elections.... where are they?

For the most part, on-line libertarians are liberals, with a gullible conservatives mixed in. Almost universally, the liberals are individuals who have prioritized legalized marijuana as their key issue. But at election time, they all ran back and voted for Obama.

The few conservatives are ideologues who follow the "limited government" mantra to the unrealistic extreme of virtual anarchy.

The Founding Fathers may not have envisioned the government we currently live under, however, they didn't envision virtual anarchy either.
 
Taft2016 said:
As are most on-line libertarians. Their numbers seems to be legion on-line, yet in actual elections.... where are they?

For the most part, on-line libertarians are liberals, with a gullible conservatives mixed in. Almost universally, the liberals are individuals who have prioritized legalized marijuana as their key issue. But at election time, they all ran back and voted for Obama.

The few conservatives are ideologues who follow the "limited government" mantra to the unrealistic extreme of virtual anarchy.

The Founding Fathers may not have envisioned the government we currently live under, however, they didn't envision virtual anarchy either.
Click to expand...

That is a really great point. I flirted with the idea of being a libertarian, but something about legalizing drugs always bothered me. For some reason, thes "so called" libertarians are as militant about drug use as left wing totalitarians are about abortion.

However I have grown disenchanted with the current GOP and see them as no better than the democrats.

In the end, I am just an individual who believes in the US Constitution as written.
 
Online libertarians are embarrassed Republicans. They don't want to be associated with pos like ila/dy or science denying morons like pmp. If they vote libertarian its only because the Republicans are not strong enough in their state to allow them to rationalize the wasted vote argument.

Real world libertarians sometimes lean in one direction or the other. The active ones might lean a bit towards what is considered the left but the majority of the whole leans right. The lean of the active probably has more to do with pragmatic considerations rather than philosophy. The argument for civil liberties is an easy winner. Only the immoral scum that identify as very socially conservative, most of who are old and still wrapped up in a fading culture war, are opposed.

The argument for economic freedom is a tougher one. There is a good counter to it morally as well as a practical one.

I don't see how anyone, who is not a pos racist/bigot, could find the libertarian position on drug legalization more troubling than the position on freedom of association. The absolute freedom of association position gives me pause and I think it could result in less liberty without far less government. Smoking a joint has no real affect on others but denying them employment, a place to live or services will. It's also far more likely to disturb social cohesion and threaten the interests of the state.

In the case of Eich, we are talking freedom of association based on beliefs and not race, gender or those things one cannot change easily. Political views are even more transient than religious ones and not as subject to dominance of a particular viewpoint (see sf's group think). If Hobby Lobby has the right to practice their religion through denying benefits to a cashier then certainly Mozilla has some right to express a view through who they would hire as CEO. The CEO is much more the face of the company and more likely to be expected to represent company values.

I don't think his actions warranted the response, but the hypocrisy of the right is unbelievable. They will always find an excuse to rationalize their prejudices. Many of them still think the state should be able to jail homosexuals while they would deny a private corporation the right to refuse an association with a homophobe. It is absurd to pretend that position leans toward less government or freer markets.
 
Teflon Don said:
That is a really great point. I flirted with the idea of being a libertarian, but something about legalizing drugs always bothered me. For some reason, thes "so called" libertarians are as militant about drug use as left wing totalitarians are about abortion.

However I have grown disenchanted with the current GOP and see them as no better than the democrats.

In the end, I am just an individual who believes in the US Constitution as written.
Click to expand...
there was a libertarian debate to help decide which would be candidate i think for governor. 90 minutes and every last minute was spent on legalizing drugs. Its too bad because most people are good with 80+% of the platform but theyve marginalized themselves over drugs.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Online libertarians are embarrassed Republicans. They don't want to be associated with pos like ila/dy or science denying morons like pmp. If they vote libertarian its only because the Republicans are not strong enough in their state to allow them to rationalize the wasted vote argument.

Real world libertarians sometimes lean in one direction or the other. The active ones might lean a bit towards what is considered the left but the majority of the whole leans right. The lean of the active probably has more to do with pragmatic considerations rather than philosophy. The argument for civil liberties is an easy winner. Only the immoral scum that identify as very socially conservative, most of who are old and still wrapped up in a fading culture war, are opposed.

The argument for economic freedom is a tougher one. There is a good counter to it morally as well as a practical one.

I don't see how anyone, who is not a pos racist/bigot, could find the libertarian position on drug legalization more troubling than the position on freedom of association. The absolute freedom of association position gives me pause and I think it could result in less liberty without far less government. Smoking a joint has no real affect on others but denying them employment, a place to live or services will. It's also far more likely to disturb social cohesion and threaten the interests of the state.

In the case of Eich, we are talking freedom of association based on beliefs and not race, gender or those things one cannot change easily. Political views are even more transient than religious ones and not as subject to dominance of a particular viewpoint (see sf's group think). If Hobby Lobby has the right to practice their religion through denying benefits to a cashier then certainly Mozilla has some right to express a view through who they would hire as CEO. The CEO is much more the face of the company and more likely to be expected to represent company values.

I don't think his actions warranted the response, but the hypocrisy of the right is unbelievable. They will always find an excuse to rationalize their prejudices. Many of them still think the state should be able to jail homosexuals while they would deny a private corporation the right to refuse an association with a homophobe. It is absurd to pretend that position leans toward less government or freer markets.
Click to expand...

Yeah it is so old school wanting to keep women from killing babies. What a crazy notion.
 
Celticguy said:
there was a libertarian debate to help decide which would be candidate i think for governor. 90 minutes and every last minute was spent on legalizing drugs. Its too bad because most people are good with 80+% of the platform but theyve marginalized themselves over drugs.
Click to expand...

Drugs is no longer even remotely close to the most controversial of libertarian issues. You are either delusional, spend too much time with your Klan or both.
 
Hasa Diga Eebowai said:
Drugs is no longer even remotely close to the most controversial of libertarian issues. You are either delusional, spend too much time with your Klan or both.
Click to expand...
Its the thing that makes LP a joke. I am fine with as its the first step to killing organized crime. But open borders bother people who look past the pot.
 
Celticguy said:
Its the thing that makes LP a joke. I am fine with as its the first step to killing organized crime. But open borders bother people who look past the pot.
Click to expand...

It bothers authoritarians, xenophobes and racists. You are delusional and need to venture beyond your trailer park more often.
 
String has a passion for science and other social issues. If he stepped out for Austrian free market economic beliefs he would get mocked on this board by the liberals as a wacko loon. He doesn't go there because he mocks social conservatives and the liberals heart it. Once he talks economics and they call him 'bat' he looses all street cred.
 
cawacko said:
String has a passion for science and other social issues. If he stepped out for Austrian free market economic beliefs he would get mocked on this board by the liberals as a wacko loon. He doesn't go there because he mocks social conservatives and the liberals heart it. Once he talks economics and they call him 'bat' he looses all street cred.
Click to expand...

Since when do I not go there?
 
What this event has done is proven the case for privacy for political donors. Laws to expose donors to this type of harrassment are anti-Democratic and smack of Fascism.
 
Threedee said:
Since your return.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. You forget desh following me around spastically posting about the topic? I engaged her and showed she had no real understanding of the topic.

Another example, was when I countered the fake libertarian grind who was trying to apologize for Dubya taking sports welfare.
 
Last edited:
I probably tuned out all of the threads that Desh was doing that on, and she could have been schooled on any topic. But, thanks for not giving up on the fight. Out of curiosity, what would your reaction be if the Rays asked TB for funds to renovate Tropicana (particularly with the fanbase not helping out as much as it could)?
 
cawacko said:
Employees of Mozilla went on twitter and demanded the CEO get fired for a $1,000 donation he made to Prop 8 in California which said marriage was between a man and a woman only.

I understand as consumers we can vote with our pocketbook. We can choose to buy or not buy from a particular company or use their product or service for whatever reasons we want (maybe there is an exception in there but speaking on the whole). But firing a guy over a political donation he made?




Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich resigns


Brendan Eich has stepped down after 11 days as chief executive of Mozilla, following criticism over a donation to the Proposition 8 campaign, which opposed gay marriage in California.

In a blog post announcing Eich’s resignation, the company that makes the Firefox browser explained that its organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. Eich made the decision to resign “for Mozilla and our community,” the post said.

Eich was named CEO on March 24. He co-founded the mozilla.org project in 1998 and was named CTO of the Mountain View-based nonprofit in 2005. Eich is the creator of JavaScript.

The Mozilla community quickly called for his resignation, pointing to a $1,000 donation he made in support of Proposition 8 in 2008:

Eich told the Guardian earlier this week that he would not resign over the controversy.

The future of Mozilla’s leadership is still being discussed. The company hopes to emerge from the recent controversy with “a renewed understanding and humility.”

“Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech,” the company wrote. “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.”

Online dating website OKCupid responded to Eich’s appointment by urging visitors to use a browser other than Firefox to visit its website. “Mozilla’s new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay couples,” a message on the website read. “We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to access OkCupid.”


http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2014/04/03/mozilla-ceo-brendan-eich-resigns/
Click to expand...

He should've been fired, not for his donation, but for creating Javascript.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top