Here is a topic I am tired of hearing about. Being liberal, apparently, means tolerating bigoted and backwards-looking values - rly?
Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
61–70 of 94 posts
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're right, people change. And when people change, they can be forgiven. Frankly all it would have taken to squash this controversy is an apology. I am confident that a quick "People change, I've changed. I understand now that people deserve the same rights and equal protection of the law, regardless of what gender they fancy." would have put this all to rest. An apology is what we would expect from a CEO that was…
He has apologized for causing "pain". It looks like he does not support gay marriage today. He does support equality. He holds more conservative viewpoints than most people. He is also a white male in his 50's born in Pittsburgh. The point is he has his position. It may change. He isn't involved in the LGBT community, so he probably is not exposed to this issue causing pain until now. It wasn't going to affect the po…
> It looks like he does not support gay marriage today. He does support equality.
Which is it? The two (not supporting gay marriage, and supporting equality) are mutually incompatible.
> It wasn't going to affect the policy of equality within Mozilla.
Do you understand why a lot of people have concerns that this might not be true, whether openly, or indirectly through decisions he might have made? Or have concerns that his views may send a signal to a lot of people that he would not welcome them the way he would welcome other potential hires?
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
He's a self-proclaimed progressive, if I read that article right.
He can proclaim himself to be whatever he likes, but money speaks and a thousand bucks to prop 8 is a pretty regressive act.
Maybe I misunderstood; I thought my parent was saying the author of this piece is conservative
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
What evidence, besides the popular vote (52%? Wow, that's a big majority /sarcasm), that Prop8 was popular? How about factoring in the ton of money the Utah Mormons threw behind Proposition 8?
It doesn't even have to be the majority to be a mainstream point of view. I wonder, at what point does someone become a "bad person"? When they agree with the 50%? 30%? 10%? 5%? --- I have haters. Yay! Nothing brings out the haters like the truth ;-) So I'm going to limit my exposure by using the wonderful edit feature. --- I agree that oppressive points of view is bad, no matter how overwhelming the majority. Obviou…
It's irrelevant how many people agree with it. 100% can agree with something that is still oppressive.
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#65Here's one thing I've been unable to understand throughout this whole controversy: What are we supposed to do about it? As far as I can tell, this was a completely grassroots thing with no organization, no central control, nothing. It just spontaneously happened . Now, I don't know how important this whole thing is. To me, it looks like an awful lot of fuss over a very little thing. But let's say that it is, in fact,…
> Now, I don't know how important this whole thing is. To me, it looks like an awful lot of fuss over a very little thing. But let's say that it is, in fact, the worst thing ever to happen in the history of the universe.
It's not clear whether the little, inconsequential thing for you is Eich's donation or his ousting as a CEO.
If your response is "both", congratulations! You have already assimilated the biggest takeaway from this: avoid taking any sort of political position while working in this industry.
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#66Here's one thing I've been unable to understand throughout this whole controversy: What are we supposed to do about it? As far as I can tell, this was a completely grassroots thing with no organization, no central control, nothing. It just spontaneously happened . Now, I don't know how important this whole thing is. To me, it looks like an awful lot of fuss over a very little thing. But let's say that it is, in fact,…
The main thing that needs to be done, is the public needs to learn & adjust its behavior. This is a sociopolitical problem, and I think it needs to be fixed by those means. Either through adjusting norms of socially accepted behavior (i.e. don't crucify someone for what they did 10 years ago) or through strong leadership from political figures/groups.
I think you will find the public will learn the opposite of what you want: This is an example to progressives that they too in some situation have the power to send strong signals about standards expected of those who expect to be in leadership positions - even in private companies.
This has been the case "forever" for moralists on the right, from long before McCarthy. Try to become a politician or high level exec in the US while showcasing features of your personal life that does not fit into a relatively conservative, Christian narrative. Your odds just became vastly worse.
This is one in a short, but growing, set of examples of situations where people have been successfully ousted for supporting relatively mainstream but still bigoted viewpoints.
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a supporter of gay marriage, and somebody who believes spirituality isn't real, this still strikes me as picking on someone Same here. To think that you can't even participate in the political process now without the thought police coming in years later to hold you accountable. And some people wonder why various forms of political groups work so hard to keep their donor lists secret? You can't have an open society…
I don't think it's fair to say "privately held belief." He supported a campaign to change public laws. What society can we have when there are no reasonable limits on how people can judge and prosecute you for your attempts to change public law?
He supported a campaign that was supported by over half the voters in CA.
By definition, if over half the people supported the position, it's "reasonable".
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
He has apologized for causing "pain". It looks like he does not support gay marriage today. He does support equality. He holds more conservative viewpoints than most people. He is also a white male in his 50's born in Pittsburgh. The point is he has his position. It may change. He isn't involved in the LGBT community, so he probably is not exposed to this issue causing pain until now. It wasn't going to affect the po…
> It looks like he does not support gay marriage today. He does support equality. Which is it? The two (not supporting gay marriage, and supporting equality) are mutually incompatible. > It wasn't going to affect the policy of equality within Mozilla. Do you understand why a lot of people have concerns that this might not be true, whether openly, or indirectly through decisions he might have made? Or have concerns th…
> Which is it? The two (not supporting gay marriage, and supporting equality) are mutually incompatible.
He supports equality at a lower resolution (in abstract) than most of us in some areas. We all have moral blind spots. He has his life experience. You can tell that his intent is good by his effort and humility. He also has a reputation of being forthright and not deceptive.
> Do you understand why a lot of people have concerns that this might not be true, whether openly, or indirectly through decisions he might have made?
That is true. He also recognized this bias and promoted a system of oversight to ensure that the culture is inclusive. Everybody has bias. We need to set up our systems to account for that reality.
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#69I wonder if he had denied the holocaust or was an active KKK member if this author would be singing the same tune.
Side note: Where I live, holocaust denial is a crime (considered to be hate speech). I was a little surprised to read that it's actually legal in the US.
It's constitutionally-protected in the U.S -- a ban would require a constitutional amendment, which is very, very hard. Many of us on both sides of the political spectrum consider America's robust free speech protections to be the keystone of our society and government.
Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
He has apologized for causing "pain". It looks like he does not support gay marriage today. He does support equality. He holds more conservative viewpoints than most people. He is also a white male in his 50's born in Pittsburgh. The point is he has his position. It may change. He isn't involved in the LGBT community, so he probably is not exposed to this issue causing pain until now. It wasn't going to affect the po…
> It looks like he does not support gay marriage today. He does support equality. Which is it? The two (not supporting gay marriage, and supporting equality) are mutually incompatible. > It wasn't going to affect the policy of equality within Mozilla. Do you understand why a lot of people have concerns that this might not be true, whether openly, or indirectly through decisions he might have made? Or have concerns th…
> Which is it? The two (not supporting gay marriage, and supporting equality) are mutually incompatible.
Please see my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7533691