Mozilla CEO resigns after donation to Prop 8

[Truth Detector]

so your definition of fascism is any political group that targets the political donors of its opponents?

now that's fucking profound.

Wrong again shit-for-brains; but this is par for the course with a dishonest dunce like you. It is anyone/group who attacks opponents for merely disagreeing with their political ideological views. Those are Marxist/Fascist tactics.

When a CEO is forced to resign because he dared to donate money to a particular proposition ideologues disagree with; that is a Fascist tactic.

When a company is targeted and its property defaced with ugly messages because that company is Christian; that is a Fascist tactic.

Clue for the clueless; it is similar to painting the Jewish Star on businesses back in Hitler’s Fascist Germany and branding people as undesirable for merely being....Jewish.

 

[Timshel]

So you think companies should have the right to fire anyone for their beliefs that are displayed outside of work, that have no impact on their work?

You think Libertarians believe in discrimination? LMAO... yeah, you need to stop listening to the fake libertarian String.

It is not that they/we believe in discrimination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association#Libertarian

If you want more I can provide plenty of first hand sources. You don't know what you are talking about.

Personally, I believe libertarianism is premised on individualism. I think racism, sexism or bigotry is absolutely against libertarian ideals. However, politics and religion are chosen. It's not the same as race or gender.

 

[maineman]

yeah... democrats are really brownshirt nationalists through and through, eh SF?

 

[maineman]

Wrong again shit-for-brains; but this is par for the course with a dishonest dunce like you. It is anyone/group who attacks opponents for merely disagreeing with their political ideological views. Those are Marxist/Fascist tactics.

and yet, fascists hate marxists.... funny that.

 

[Truth Detector]

and yet, fascists hate marxists.... funny that.

Ironic isn't it? Birds of a feather eh?

 

[Truth Detector]

yeah... democrats are really brownshirt nationalists through and through, eh SF?

Well; if you act like a Fascist, engage the tactics of a Fascist, well, you just might be a Fascist.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Yes, they do. It's really funny that you think otherwise. Let me ask you this, do you think libertarians believe the government should prohibit employers from firing employees for their beliefs that are displayed outside of work and that have no impact on their work?

This has nothing to with the government.

Now there's a substantive rebuttal.

Also, too, just for giggles, name a libertarian. Any libertarian. Just throw a name out.

A rebuttal to what? Your nonsense about what YOU think Libertarians believe? How about you show us a libertarian that supports what you claim? But no, instead you will ramble on with what the left THINKS Libertarians stand for.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

yeah... democrats are really brownshirt nationalists through and through, eh SF?

Didn't say Democrats are Maine. Tell me... is this an example of liberals 'tolerance'???

 

[maineman]

Well; if you act like a Fascist, engage the tactics of a Fascist, well, you just might be a Fascist.

again...someone who uses "fascist" as an epithet without understanding the rather complex definition of the term.

not surprising, really.

 

[maineman]

Didn't say Democrats are Maine. Tell me... is this an example of liberals 'tolerance'???

no...it's just obvious that you know as little about fascism as TD does.... my mistake if I thought your joint ignorance was mutually focused.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It is not that they/we believe in discrimination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_association#Libertarian

If you want more I can provide plenty of first hand sources. You don't know what you are talking about.

Personally, I believe libertarianism is premised on individualism. I think racism, sexism or bigotry is absolutely against libertarian ideals. However, politics and religion are chosen. It's not the same as race or gender.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...t-exposes-split-in-silicon-valley-values.html

 

[Bonestorm]

This has nothing to with the government.

I know it doesn't (which is one of the reason that the "fascism" thing is so stupid it drools). But I said that, yes, libertarians think companies should have the right to fire anyone for their beliefs that are displayed outside of work, that have no impact on their work. You said that libertarians do not think so. And that left me wondering, well if libertarians do not think that companies should have the right to fire employees under the circumstances, who do these libertarians think should deprive corporations of that right. The only actor I could think of that could do so is the government. So I decided, hey, let me ask SF if he thinks libertarians support government intervention here to deprive corporations of that right. You declined to answer. So let me ask a different way. Who should curtail a company's right to firing employees under the circumstances presented if not the government?

A rebuttal to what? Your nonsense about what YOU think Libertarians believe? How about you show us a libertarian that supports what you claim? But no, instead you will ramble on with what the left THINKS Libertarians stand for.

Name a libertarian. Just one. Any one will do.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

no...it's just obvious that you know as little about fascism as TD does.... my mistake if I thought your joint ignorance was mutually focused.

LMAO... actually, you have not refuted a think I have stated, so please... do shut your ass.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I know it doesn't (which is one of the reason that the "fascism" thing is so stupid it drools).

The fact that you think fascist attitudes can only involve a government shows how little you understand the term.

But I said that, yes, libertarians think companies should have the right to fire anyone for their beliefs that are displayed outside of work, that have no impact on their work.

Yet you cannot find a single one that states that. You just keep saying it over and over again hoping the lemmings on the left don't notice that you give no evidence to support your nonsense. Libertarians do not believe as you continue to claim. They do not believe you can lose your job due to beliefs that do not affect your job.

Name a libertarian. Just one. Any one will do.

So you couldn't find one that agreed with you?

 

[Timshel]

A rebuttal to what? Your nonsense about what YOU think Libertarians believe? How about you show us a libertarian that supports what you claim? But no, instead you will ramble on with what the left THINKS Libertarians stand for.

You are an idiot.

This is an old LP plank.
http://www.dehnbase.org/lpus/library/platform/foaagd.html

FEE article against the recent Arizona law, but still supporting freedom of association.
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/freedom-of-association-is-no-excuse-to-target-gays

Reason article on wedding cake flap.
http://reason.com/archives/2014/03/06/nobody-gay-or-straight-has-the-right-to/print

 

[USFREEDOM911]

So in his past history with the firm, there is no indication/reports/complaints about him... yet because he does not adhere to the proper group think, they oust him. How fascist.

This now clears the way for someone to be fired, ONLY because they support Planned Parenthood.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I don't disagree. That's why there's that caveat for "activities that have no impact . . . on the business of the employer." I mean, if Herb down in shipping and receiving is a retrograde bigot that donates to hate groups, it has no effect on his ability to perform his job or on the business of the employer. Not necessarily so for the CEO.

How does it affect his ability to preform as a CEO?

 

[Timshel]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-...t-exposes-split-in-silicon-valley-values.html

How is this responsive to my post?

 

[Bonestorm]

The fact that you think fascist attitudes can only involve a government shows how little you understand the term.

Alternatively, it shows how current usage of the term is so divorced from it's actual meaning that the term now merely describes activites that the user of the terms disagrees with. Fascism requires the coercive power of the state. Absent the the use (or advocating for the use) of state power, there can be no fascism.

Private parties (Eich, Mozilla and Eich's many detractors) all exercising their rights to speech and association is a celebration of freedom. It ain't fascist.

Yet you cannot find a single one that states that. You just keep saying it over and over again hoping the lemmings on the left don't notice that you give no evidence to support your nonsense. Libertarians do not believe as you continue to claim. They do not believe you can lose your job due to beliefs that do not affect your job.

Uh, to ask the question a third time, who is it that libertarians believe should protect employees from losing their job for their beliefs? If companies shouldn't have this power, who should take it from them? The government? The Justice League? The Avengers?

So you couldn't find one that agreed with you?

Just name one.

 

[Timshel]

http://www.lp.org/news/press-releases/libertarians-blast-sotomayor-pick

“While Judge Sotomayor deserves a fair and impartial hearing, Supreme Court justices should be nominated for their thorough knowledge of and adherence to the Constitution and the rule of law,” said William Redpath, Libertarian National Committee Chairman.


“By nominating Sonia Sotomayor, Barack Obama has made it clear he prefers an activist for his personal causes over a rational interpreter of law,” said Redpath.


Sotomayor is best known for the Ricci v. DeStafano case, in which the New Haven, Conn. fire department decided it didn’t like the results of an officers promotion exam in which whites and Hispanic firefighters outperformed black firefighters. The city threw out the results of the exam, denying several firefighters promotions solely because of their race. The firefighters sued the city, claiming racial discrimination under Title VVI of the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.


Sotomayor disagreed, ruling the city has a right to discriminate against white and Hispanic public employees to construct a politically correct racial mix in hiring, even if it goes against the results of a racially-neutral competency exam.


The case is now before the Supreme Court. Sotomayor has had her rulings thrown out by the court a troubling four times. In three of those cases, the Court ruled Sotomayor had incorrectly interpreted the law.

“It is troubling that Obama, who won the highest elected office in the world without racial preferences, would nominate someone who openly admits the government should racially discriminate against its own citizens to serve the needs of political correctness,” said Redpath.


“Libertarians believe that, while the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of association allows private parties to hire whomever they please, government has no right to discriminate. Public employers should treat all citizens of all colors, races and ethnicities with equal respect and value and Sotomayor’s radical rulings are a jarring departure from that principle.”