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

Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

christianheilmann.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 127 posts

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#21

Post by joshstrange »

speeder wrote: post #3
codeoclock wrote: post #2

He had the right to free speech. He exercised his right to free speech. He had to deal with the consequences. There is no right to free speech without consequences. Each and every person who has the right to free speech (because remember, many don't) can say whatever they like, but cannot possibly expect it to never affect them further down the road. Particularly when you're in the position of CEO where you're expect…

Or basically: You have free speech, but shut up, who knows if something you said in the past will ruin your career in the future. (does not even matter if you still believe in what you said in the past or not... I did not saw anyone asking Eich)

> (does not even matter if you still believe in what you said in the past or not... I did not saw anyone asking Eich)

Full stop. He had ample opportunity to speak out but he didn't. When someone says "I believe X" I assume that that person believes X until they either say "I don't believe X" or "I believe in Y" where Y is the opposite/different viewpoint on the same issue. Eich has made no such statement therefore I can only assume he is still anti-marriage equality, a homophobe, and not the right choice as the CEO of Mozilla.

Yes, you have free speech but just as codeoclock (and countless other HN'ers) said, you have to deal with the consequences. What you are proposing is a world where we can say whatever we want but never be held to what we say. I, for one, do not want to live in a world like that. I have said things in the past that I later changed my stance on and I have made every effort to make my change of view just as public as the original statement was. Sometimes this means talking to an individual or a small group and sometimes it means posting it to twitter.

I believe that if Eich had come out and said that his previous stance on marriage equality was wrong and he has since changed his view that this would not have ended the same way. Instead in both his blog posts [0][1] after this whole thing broke he drones on about how he will treat everyone fairly and how his personal beliefs will not affect his performance as CEO but he cleverly dances around the fact that he feels that homosexuals do not deserve the same rights as heterosexuals.

[0] https://brendaneich.com/2014/03/inclusiveness-at-mozilla/ [1] https://brendaneich.com/2014/04/the-next-mission/

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#22

Post by zimbatm »

Internet mobs is a horrible phenomenon. Internet was supposed to enable sharing of culture and better the understanding of each other. Instead we get these groups of people who spit bile at a target and just make things worse overall. How ironic that one of the people who helped create this system now gets pushed aside.

The thing is that it works. I read some hate-inducing title and start to get worked up. My judgement is clouded and I might post some more inflammatory content. What is it that makes me react that way ? Every time I do it I don't even feel good after that. This primal instinct has come up and I feel stupid, angry and ashamed. Where did the noble sentiments like compassion and tolerance go ? I wish there was an antidote, peace-inducing titles to balance this out.

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#23

Post by tomelders »

nailer wrote: post #17
tomelders wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is madness. Is it ok for someone to lose their job for being racist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for not being racist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for being sexist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for not being sexist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for being homophobic? Yes. Is it ok for someone to lose their job for not being homophobic? No. Do people lose their jobs for be…

You assume not supporting gay marriage makes someone a homophobe. Fine, but others would disagree.

It does. You do not get to chose the parameters of what makes a homophobe. The people who suffer at the whim of homophobes make that distinction. Opposition to same sex marriage is 100% homophobic. Same sex marriage doesn't hurt anyone. It's prejudice, plain and simple.

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#24

Post by daveqr »

brianchu wrote: post #11

Just so people are clear here, America has never had a right to free speech in the sense that a lot of people seem to be thinking. America has only ever had a legal right to free speech (and even then with many exceptions [1]); only government is bound by this. People tend to forget that the Constitution (and First Amendment) only applies to government. I haven't made up my mind whether Mozilla should have fired Bren…

People aren't concerned about the legal right to free speech here, they're concerned about the principle of free speech.

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#25

Post by purringmeow »

tomelders wrote: post #12
Pacabel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I can tell, you're suggesting that it's perfectly acceptable for somebody to lose his or her job merely for expressing a stance against gay marriage. Does that mean that it's also perfectly acceptable for somebody to lose his or her job merely for expressing a stance in favor of gay marriage?

This is madness. Is it ok for someone to lose their job for being racist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for not being racist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for being sexist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for not being sexist? Is it ok for someone to lose their job for being homophobic? Yes. Is it ok for someone to lose their job for not being homophobic? No. Do people lose their jobs for be…

Who said Eich is a homophobe?

If marriage were a right, why are we denying it to so many groups - not only gays, but polygamists and relatives?

Also, do not equate racism and interracial marriages with homosexual marriages. The former is just a matter of skin color - a black man and a white man are the same. If we go by the racist logic, it would be OK to deny a tanned white man marrying a pale white woman.

Homosexual marriage is a whole other matter and a lot of people don't know where they stand. If you want the public to support your cause, no matter what it is, it would be wise to be positive, firm and unemotional. I am sure the media sh*tstorm that hit B.Eich has affected a number of people and undoubtedly turned some of them away from pro LGBT causes.

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#26

Post by joshstrange »

rnnr wrote: post #9
codeoclock wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No no no, not "shut up" at all. That's not what I said. But, bear in mind that everything you say can affect your future. Which is totally fair enough. Judging a persons character by what they have said and done in the past is standard, and fair, practice. Expecting immunity from everything you've ever said or done is unrealistic. If Eich no longer believes what he believed, it's on him to make sure he makes that poi…

I don't think Eich would deny job to someone just because (s)he was gay. He didn't tried or even thought to split any gay couple apart. He just couldn't accept a definition of marriage which includes same sex couples. But those are subtle details for the liberal fascists.

> He just couldn't accept a definition of marriage which includes same sex couples.

Then he took it a step further and donated to group that was working to destroy human rights for homosexuals.

> He didn't tried or even thought to split any gay couple apart.

You're right, he didn't try to split a gay couple apart, he just sought to dissolve their marriage...

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#27

Post by steego »

thoradam wrote: post #14
Pacabel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I can tell, you're suggesting that it's perfectly acceptable for somebody to lose his or her job merely for expressing a stance against gay marriage. Does that mean that it's also perfectly acceptable for somebody to lose his or her job merely for expressing a stance in favor of gay marriage?

This really isn't that complicated, he had views that the community was overwhelmingly against, hence he was not qualified to serve as CEO. The community did not fire him. Also, there's a fundamental difference between the two views you juxtaposed. One suppresses the freedom of others, while the other promotes it. You can't really be intolerant by being against intolerance.

> You can't really be intolerant by being against intolerance.

I'm pretty sure religious people can be intolerant of gay people who are intolerant of religious people.

-or-

Gay people can be intolerant of religious people who are intolerant of gay marriage.

I, for one, have no tolerance for all this intolerance.

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#28

Post by betterunix »

joshstrange wrote: post #21
speeder wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or basically: You have free speech, but shut up, who knows if something you said in the past will ruin your career in the future. (does not even matter if you still believe in what you said in the past or not... I did not saw anyone asking Eich)

> (does not even matter if you still believe in what you said in the past or not... I did not saw anyone asking Eich) Full stop. He had ample opportunity to speak out but he didn't. When someone says "I believe X" I assume that that person believes X until they either say "I don't believe X" or "I believe in Y" where Y is the opposite/different viewpoint on the same issue. Eich has made no such statement therefore I…

"he cleverly dances around the fact that he feels that homosexuals do not deserve the same rights as heterosexuals."

Yes, and obviously that is completely orthogonal to the kind of treatment he has received over his beliefs about gay marriage. It is easy to criticize people who are afraid to speak their minds when you have an army of thought police standing with you ready to punish anyone who dares to disagree.

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#29

Post by davidw »

betterunix wrote: post #13
brianchu wrote: post #11

Just so people are clear here, America has never had a right to free speech in the sense that a lot of people seem to be thinking. America has only ever had a legal right to free speech (and even then with many exceptions [1]); only government is bound by this. People tend to forget that the Constitution (and First Amendment) only applies to government. I haven't made up my mind whether Mozilla should have fired Bren…

That does not mean it is acceptable for people to band together and bully anyone who disagrees with them. All it means is that the legal system is not going to help us, and that we have to take it upon ourselves to remind people not to behave in this manner.

Something I've been wondering about this confusing issue is: do people think it's never ok to ostracize someone for their views? Say he donated money to the KKK, or ... you make up some really heinous, hideous belief ...? Still ok?

And going the other way, to something a bit broader/more mainstream, say he donated to the Republican Party. Ok to ostracize him?

To me it seems like people have some kind of dividing line that's not cut and dried, possibly depending on their own beliefs.

Re: Torn and weary (on Brendan Eich and Mozilla)

#30

Post by joshstrange »

nailer wrote: post #10
codeoclock wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No no no, not "shut up" at all. That's not what I said. But, bear in mind that everything you say can affect your future. Which is totally fair enough. Judging a persons character by what they have said and done in the past is standard, and fair, practice. Expecting immunity from everything you've ever said or done is unrealistic. If Eich no longer believes what he believed, it's on him to make sure he makes that poi…

So, as Pacabel just asked, would you support someone being forced to leave their job because they supported gay marriage?

This is a ridiculous question, of course not. Please don't try to act like pro/anti gay marriage are equally ethical positions, they aren't.
Post reply on HN