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

Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 94 posts

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#81

Post by lisper »

sliverstorm wrote: post #54
lisper wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not convenient, it's simply a fact. The discrimination against Brendan was based on something that he did . Discrimination against gays is based on something that they are . The former is morally justifiable, the latter is not. It really is that simple.

No, you said he is a bigot, and that is why you advocate discriminating against him. Let me quote you: Brendan Eich was not fired because he made a political donation [...] he is a bigot

OK, let me be more precise: he was fired because he donated to a cause that cannot be justified on any grounds other than bigotry, and when called on it, failed to repent. So I don't know whether he is a bigot or not, but he definitely acted like one, and when given the opportunity to repent, he chose not to. That's enough to justify his removal from the grown-up table.

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#82

Post by lisper »

microscopic wrote: post #71
lisper wrote: post #33

Brendan Eich was not fired because he made a political donation. He was fired because the particular political donation he made is evidence that he is a bigot, that he has a broken moral code . There is not, and never has been, any justification for denying gays the right to marry except prejudice and bigotry. Every single non-religious argument against gay marriage has been definitively debunked. Therefore, discrimi…

"He was fired because the particular political donation he made is evidence that he is a bigot, that he has a broken moral code." Just because a person is a bigot doesn't necessarily mean that s/he is a bad person. I've met racist people and even I am able to maintain some level of respect for them. This is what being open-minded is. Hurting people just because they have a different philosophical belief than yours is…

I didn't say he was a "bad person", I said he had a "broken moral code." Those aren't the same thing. Maybe his moral code is only a little bit broken and he's otherwise a fine person (I have no idea). But this little bit matters a lot if you're the CEO of a company.

BTW, I am not taking a position about whether removing Brendon was the correct decision (I don't have enough information to have an opinion about that), only that is was justifiable.

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#84

Post by Crito »

briantakita wrote: post #53
Crito wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That post is neither an apology nor a recant. He does not acknowledge that what he did was wrong. It is nothing more than a tone-deaf defense of himself.

He also apologized for causing pain. He also stepped down. And since when is an agenda of equality a bad thing? He probably doesn't think his support of the proposition was wrong. I don't either. I'm for Gay Marriage. I'm also for rational public discourse that respects different points of view. --- Thanks for the downvote. I know it's an emotional subject. Maybe you have a good counterpoint to express? Expression vi…

"I'm sorry for the way you took that." is the classic non-apology. He has done absolutely nothing but defend himself.

> "Thanks for the downvote."

I didn't downvote you. I cannot downvote you because you cannot downvote responses that you receive on HN. Such a persecution complex you've got going on there...

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#85

Post by daveqr »

lisper wrote: post #33

Brendan Eich was not fired because he made a political donation. He was fired because the particular political donation he made is evidence that he is a bigot, that he has a broken moral code . There is not, and never has been, any justification for denying gays the right to marry except prejudice and bigotry. Every single non-religious argument against gay marriage has been definitively debunked. Therefore, discrimi…

> the particular political donation he made is evidence that he is a bigot

This is silly. It's nothing of the sort.

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#86

Post by lisper »

daveqr wrote: post #85
lisper wrote: post #33

Brendan Eich was not fired because he made a political donation. He was fired because the particular political donation he made is evidence that he is a bigot, that he has a broken moral code . There is not, and never has been, any justification for denying gays the right to marry except prejudice and bigotry. Every single non-religious argument against gay marriage has been definitively debunked. Therefore, discrimi…

> the particular political donation he made is evidence that he is a bigot This is silly. It's nothing of the sort.

Of course it is. It may not be proof but it is definitely evidence. He wants to deny gay people equal protection under the law. One of the reasons one might want this is anti-gay bigotry.

In fact, in light of the fact that all of the objective arguments against gay marriage have at this point been completely debunked, I don't see too many other possibilities.

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#87

Post by panarky »

vajorie wrote: post #74
programminggeek wrote: post #15

Between the way our industry has handled this latest thing with Mozilla and the way that related issues like gender inequality is handled at various conferences, I am finding myself less and less wanting to be involved with the community at large. It feels more and more like if you disagree with what a very vocal minority believes, you are going to be ostracized to the point that you could lose your job. I have a fam…

> I have a family to take care of so losing my job would be a pretty big deal. I wonder how you'd feel if your company hired a CEO who would want to take away your spouse's benefits because [insert arbitrary reason here]. There is a reason why people are vocal: they get hurt otherwise.

You're getting downvoted for spreading disinformation. Be honest or be gone.

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#88

Post by briantakita »

Crito wrote: post #84
briantakita wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He also apologized for causing pain. He also stepped down. And since when is an agenda of equality a bad thing? He probably doesn't think his support of the proposition was wrong. I don't either. I'm for Gay Marriage. I'm also for rational public discourse that respects different points of view. --- Thanks for the downvote. I know it's an emotional subject. Maybe you have a good counterpoint to express? Expression vi…

"I'm sorry for the way you took that." is the classic non-apology. He has done absolutely nothing but defend himself. > "Thanks for the downvote." I didn't downvote you. I cannot downvote you because you cannot downvote responses that you receive on HN. Such a persecution complex you've got going on there...

At this point we are mincing words. He said sorry he caused pain. That is hardly a nonpology. It does not justify the reaction and pain caused to him.

He has promoted equality within Mozilla. The sad thing is people also started to protest Mozilla, an organization with LGBT workers. It's free software with an independent agenda. Now it's malaigned as being homophobic.

The debate is being dumbed down with namecalling and blowing things out of proportion. It's become black and white with no room for nuance.

It's sad and scary.

-

I'm commenting on the downvotes and flagging as an act of suppressing a rational discussion. Its similar to the shaming and cyber bullying. The whole "you disagree with me, I'll punish you" mentality that this movement has taken is not good for our culture. Surely we are more mature than that.

I don't have a complex and its not for you to judge.

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#89

Post by sliverstorm »

lisper wrote: post #80
microscopic wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand you are passionate about this topic but please consider this line of thinking: Here is what I am seeing: "The discrimination against Brendan was based on something that he did." [therefore the discrimination is morally justifiable] He did what he thought was right by his own standards. I don't suppose you are for punishing people who do things based on what they believe is right. Rather, you want to puni…

> He did what he thought was right by his own standards. I understand that. What I am saying is: his standards are broken. > Rather, you want to punish Brendan, in part, because of the nature of his belief. No. You can be a bigot in private if you want to, that is your right. But that's not what Brendon did. He 1) took action to try to get his (and other's) bigotry enshrined into law (successfully, I might add) and 2…

you may not seek to enshrine your bigotry into law

There are no such rules. You may feel that way, but People get to seek to enshrine any damn thing into law, if they like. If it is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court will strike it down. That's how the system works.

P.S. Using more words doesn't make your argument better or your source more authoritative. You can just call it "the Constitution", without fear of miscommunication.

Re: Mozilla's Gay-Marriage Litmus Test Violates Liberal Values

#90

Post by npsimons »

daveqr wrote: post #83
academicish wrote: post #61

Here is a topic I am tired of hearing about. Being liberal, apparently, means tolerating bigoted and backwards-looking values - rly?

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.

People are more than free to express any opinion they have, including the opinion that bigoted discriminating opinions are wrong, and don't really fit the ideals of an organization such as Mozilla.
Post reply on HN