Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 230 posts

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#151

Post by twoodfin »

m0a0t0 wrote: post #143
twoodfin wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic, I'm sure no one working at Mozilla voted for Barack Obama in 2008 when he publicly held a position you now consider in the same ethical category as that a "racist" would hold. This is not so far removed from saying Mary Jones shouldn't be CEO of Mozilla because she donated to a campaign against CO2 emission restrictions: Again by analogy with a settled political issue, "She's denying Global Warming. Yo…

Sometimes you have to vote for the lesser evil. It's pragmatism. Choose between the person who will try and stop gay marriage from happening by enshrining it in law or the person who won't actively stop it (or someone who has no chance of getting in). Seems quite obvious.

So you'd vote for a Barack Obama who professed support for racial segregation as long as the other major party candidate did, too?

I'm not arguing against voting pragmatically, I'm arguing that calling opposition to same sex marriage akin to racism today is a nonsensical comparison. Maybe it will look that way in hindsight, but it's not fair to hold anybody to hypothetical future standards.

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#152

Post by NeonVice »

intortus wrote: post #25
mikestew wrote: post #8

Just the CEO? Who else shall we burn at the stake? Mary, the office manager, goes to church every Sunday. How did she vote? John over in mobile dev is a devout Muslim, I'll bet he doesn't take kindly to such things as gay marriage. Time to start scanning through those campaign contribution records for Prop 8 and seeing if a JOIN on the employee database gives us any results. I've always held to the idea that my job i…

There's a huge difference between holding general religious beliefs and contributing financially to a political movement specifically pursuing institutional discrimination of a large class of Americans. I'm a little troubled by the chilling effects that career and public opinion can have on political expression, but it's hard to generate sympathy for blatantly unconstitutional, horrendously discriminatory forms of po…

Government benefits should only be tied to civil unions. The government should get the hell out of marriage and couples can determine if they want to consider themselves married.

I would never say that changing the definition of marriage is blatantly unconstitutional. The constitution says nothing about the right of two people of the same sex getting married nor does it say anything about traditional marriage. You could argue equal protection under the law, but as it stands a heterosexual man and a homosexual are both legally not permitted to marry a man. Blatantly is absolutely the wrong word to use.

Also, your insinuation that religious people should not use their deeply held beliefs to influence the societies in which they live is disturbing. You have a vote and they have a vote.

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#153

Post by twoodfin »

wpietri wrote: post #127
DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you support employees being fired for supporting gay marriage then? I don't see any difference in the two positions (both are using their paychecks to advanced a political cause), except that you personally agree with one position and not the other.

The difference is that only one of those positions in a boss is threatening. Take interracial marriage as a parallel. If you are in a mixed-race marriage and your boss has tried to prevent interracial marriage, you could reasonably feel threatened. Whereas if your boss supports equality, you won't worry whether you are in a same-race or mixed-race marriage.

Threatened how?

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#154

Post by drone »

intortus wrote: post #144
drone wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, a Catholic who actively tithes, should not be allowed to be CEO of Mozilla? What about a Lutheran that actively tithes? Both of these organizations work directly to prevent gay marriage, and that money goes to amplifying that cause.

It's plausibly deniable that you're contributing tithes specifically to take rights away from gays. It's hard to deny that if you're contributing to Prop 8.

I would make the argument that contributing the Catholic church is far worse for homosexuals, children, women, and the planet than Prop 8 ever could be. But then again, that's why I don't go around making check lists of appropriate contributions for everyone in my company around me...

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#155

Post by freehunter »

slantyyz wrote: post #146
freehunter wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"marriage"? What is that? Marriage is a defined legal construct, not an abstract idea. >We can't punish people for participating in our form of government, even if we disagree with them. Of course we can. It's the government that can't. We can freely choose who we associate with, and we can freely choose to not associate with people who hold opinions that we feel are immoral, even if the opinion isn't illegal.

>> Of course we can. It's the government that can't. Is that true? I'm not American or a lawyer so I don't know what workplace discrimination laws are like, but I would assume that in many western countries, you can't legally discriminate against or harass workers or fellow employees based on their beliefs. This opens up a legal question to which I don't know the answer: Where would these "step down" tweets tread leg…

I don't think he could be fired for his belief. The goal is to pressure him to step down of his own accord.

You may have a point on workplace harassment, although I would doubt that he would push for that because of the negative PR that would rain down upon the company.

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#156

Post by notdonspaulding »

PeterOliver wrote: post #145
DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you support employees being fired for supporting gay marriage then? I don't see any difference in the two positions (both are using their paychecks to advanced a political cause), except that you personally agree with one position and not the other.

Where did all of this moral relativism come from? What Eich believes goes against basic human rights. This isn't some argument about tax rates.

Which basic human right does his belief go against, exactly?

In all sincerity, if you had to write down a list of human rights, ordered by most-to-least basic, where would it fall on the list? Which rights would be more basic? Which less?

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#157

Post by RunningDroid »

m0a0t0 wrote: post #141
hkphooey wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Mary the office manager, she claims to be a Christian but I've always suspected her of being a witch. Burn her! Drown her! Do both! But whatever you do, don't go near John, because I hear he gets upset over cartoons and he might react violently rather than meekly accepting punishment like a good Christian. If you're sick of the political correctness and need a good laugh, watch this short piece by British aethis…

Why is it that for some people political correctness - something which tries to make people respect one another more and be nice - is the devil. You have the right to say almost whatever you want. That doesn't mean you fucking should, does it? There's a big difference between the two

Because for some people political correctness is about lying to make others feel good.

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#158

Post by twoodfin »

PeterOliver wrote: post #145
DerpDerpDerp wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you support employees being fired for supporting gay marriage then? I don't see any difference in the two positions (both are using their paychecks to advanced a political cause), except that you personally agree with one position and not the other.

Where did all of this moral relativism come from? What Eich believes goes against basic human rights. This isn't some argument about tax rates.

I think free speech is a basic human right, too, but I wouldn't demand my CEO be fired if he gave a million dollars to try to get a Constitutional amendment passed to overturn Citizens United.

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#159

Post by burntroots »

m0a0t0 wrote: post #141
hkphooey wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Mary the office manager, she claims to be a Christian but I've always suspected her of being a witch. Burn her! Drown her! Do both! But whatever you do, don't go near John, because I hear he gets upset over cartoons and he might react violently rather than meekly accepting punishment like a good Christian. If you're sick of the political correctness and need a good laugh, watch this short piece by British aethis…

Why is it that for some people political correctness - something which tries to make people respect one another more and be nice - is the devil. You have the right to say almost whatever you want. That doesn't mean you fucking should, does it? There's a big difference between the two

You've heard of the chilling effect, right? I would say insisting on being politically correct in all things or you're not fit to run a company would qualify as censorship.

Re: Mozilla employees tell Brendan Eich he needs to “step down”

#160

Post by slantyyz »

wpietri wrote: post #74
david927 wrote: post #5

It's his personal view. What does freedom mean if it's only about views that everyone likes?

Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence. He is free to express his opinions of gay people. They are free to express their opinions of him. See how that works? Everybody's free to say their piece. Of course, the problem here isn't his view , which nobody actually knows. It's that he helped strip a civil right from a bunch of people, including some of those he will now be in charge of.

>> He is free to express his opinions of gay people.

Context matters though. If you make these opinions at the workplace and someone feels threatened, discriminated against or harassed, there are legal repercussions.

And I assume this goes both ways. If you have an unpopular view that is expressed outside the workplace but are harassed by your coworkers, there is a risk of legal repercussions on those coworkers too.

Post reply on HN