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

Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

teamrarebit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 258 posts

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#231

Post by npizzolato »

glesica wrote: post #227
yeukhon wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is gay a protected class then? If the answer is no, then homophobes is not a protected class. If the answer is yes, then homophobes is a protected class in your definition. Will I want to work with someone who is pro-Nazism? Probably not, but will I respect his belief? Yes. But will I use that to disqualify him from being my co-worker? No. I would be lying to say I wouldn't feel threaten to know I am working with som…

I don't think that's how protected classes work. "Person of color" is a protected class. "Racist" is not. "Christian" is (perhaps, I'm not sure) a protected class. "Person who hates Christians" is not.

"Christian" is a protected class. From Wikipedia[1], the list is:

- Race - Color - Religion - National origin - Age (40 and over) - Sex - Pregnancy - Citizenship - Familial status - Disability status - Veteran status - Genetic information

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#232

Post by true_religion »

protomyth wrote: post #97
pessimizer wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>After all, after people get paid from their job, shouldn't it be their right that they can use their money as they please? If they spent that money attacking your family, would you be willing to do business with them?

I would be very surprised if in an average day you don't buy product or services from a company that has donated or has C-level executives that have donated to some cause that attacks you or your family. I know of at least one company that donates to a group because of the group's work in China that is directly attacking the families of their customers in the US. Before this goes to my personal views: I'm not Califor…

> I would be very surprised if in an average day you don't buy product or services from a company that has donated or has C-level executives that have donated to some cause that attacks you or your family.

I'd actually be surprised if this is the case. What possible causes would they donate to that will count as an 'attack'?

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#233

Post by vsviridov »

alexqgb wrote: post #207
vsviridov wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Helloooo... This is in USA. Does the word "lobbying" ring a bell?

Lobbying is fine. After all, a representative government can't function if talking to your representatives is a crime. The problem is not the right to deliver petitions. It's the practice of doing so with cash (or check!) included.

Huh, lobbying, in my view, these days is nothing but paying people lots of money to steer their decisions... Otherwise why bother doing it...

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#234

Post by protomyth »

true_religion wrote: post #232
protomyth wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be very surprised if in an average day you don't buy product or services from a company that has donated or has C-level executives that have donated to some cause that attacks you or your family. I know of at least one company that donates to a group because of the group's work in China that is directly attacking the families of their customers in the US. Before this goes to my personal views: I'm not Califor…

> I would be very surprised if in an average day you don't buy product or services from a company that has donated or has C-level executives that have donated to some cause that attacks you or your family. I'd actually be surprised if this is the case. What possible causes would they donate to that will count as an 'attack'?

The case I site is an environmental group, but there are actually quite a few different attacks (lawsuit based) that happen in the US.

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#235

Post by ndarilek »

rjknight wrote: post #213
ndarilek wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thought experiment: imagine a law that severely limited the power and abilities of straight white men, white men, or even just men . Imagine that law severely impacted your ability to participate in some major institution or process. Maybe you couldn't start a business. Maybe you couldn't pee standing up. Hell, pick anything . Imagine there were people who felt so threatened by your starting a business or pissing sta…

I'm a vaguely left-libertarian-ish person, so my view on gay marriage is that I cannot see a reason why it should not be allowed and, beyond that, it's pretty much none of my business. But I do find it difficult to draw a line at which marriage should not be allowed. People like to raise the issue of polygamy, and I can't honestly think of a good reason why polygamous marriage shouldn't be allowed either. The example…

For me, it boils down to the fact that we as a society grant or deny rights and privileges based on whom we place in category Married vs. !Married. As long as that category includes unrestricted hospital visitation, financial/insurance benefits, etc. then we have no business legislating it, and saying "Persons X and Y (and, hell, Z, Q and P) who truly love each other and consent to marriage are denied these things because they don't meet our definition of what marriage means" strikes me as no different than "Person X is denied the right to vote because their skin color is not the one we associate with sound mind and ability to vote." I'm sure there are a number of institutions that any group wouldn't consider marriage, and that's up to each individual to decide. But as soon as the state and institutions tangled marriage with equal treatment, they set themselves up for this struggle and have to address the inevitable inequity.

Anyhow, I realize you probably agree with this. My point is that the individual lines we draw aren't relevant when people's lives, health and financial livelihood hinge on whether or not society determines them married. This is a civil rights issue, nothing less, and it's hard to see support for an anti-gay-marriage organization as anything less than funding an organization that fights against equality. I wonder how we'd feel if the donation was instead for, say, a proposition that would bring back some aspects of Separate but Equal, and how the rhetoric would change.

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#236

Post by true_religion »

protomyth wrote: post #234
true_religion wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would be very surprised if in an average day you don't buy product or services from a company that has donated or has C-level executives that have donated to some cause that attacks you or your family. I'd actually be surprised if this is the case. What possible causes would they donate to that will count as an 'attack'?

The case I site is an environmental group, but there are actually quite a few different attacks (lawsuit based) that happen in the US.

Is the argument then they are hurting the environment or want to ergo are attacking your family indirectly?

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#237

Post by protomyth »

true_religion wrote: post #236
protomyth wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The case I site is an environmental group, but there are actually quite a few different attacks (lawsuit based) that happen in the US.

Is the argument then they are hurting the environment or want to ergo are attacking your family indirectly?

It was direct lawsuits (not me, just a company I know).

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#238

Post by dnr »

pvnick wrote: post #63

I don't know what it is about gay marriage that draws people in to this ridiculous witch hunt. I'm neutral on the issue because I feel it's complicated like every other polarizing topic, but to a lot of folks it's solid black-and-white, good-vs-evil. But the pro-gay-marriage crowd seems to go beyond that. To them, it's so black-and-white that one's not even allowed to hold the other view. These people don't even ackn…

It's not intellectual hubris. It's not intellectual at all, and it has nothing to do with beliefs. It's emotional, because love is emotional. When someone tells a gay person that they can't marry the person they love, they are telling them that their love is not the same as straight people's love, that it's lesser. It doesn't matter if that's not what they meant to say, or if they have statistics and graphs to make some point about the effects on greater society. The inevitable conclusion of any position other than full marriage equality is that same-sex love is something different. To those that feel it, the statement is an insult pointed directly at one of the strongest emotions that any human can feel. It hurts tremendously.

Are you surprised by the way people react after someone insults one of the most precious and important parts of their lives?

Re: Goodbye, Firefox Marketplace

#239

Post by ttdi »

judah wrote: post #165
alecdibble wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Society has shifted on this issue, such that the traditional is considered unacceptable to hold; you're ostracized with negative labels should you hold the unfashionable position..." Couldn't you say the same thing about civil rights? Slavery? Colonization? At some point these ideas were considered 'OK' by society and then at some point they were considered 'Not OK'. Are these simply 'fashions' to you? I think PG's…

Yes, they are fashions. Some of them may be good, some may be bad, but they are fashions. It is conceivable that if we find a planet with alien life, there will be calls for colonizaton, for instance. And it could be a good thing. Let's play an intellectual game. Is it possible to imagine a sensible reason for Eich to hold the view he and others hold? If you are unable to imagine such a reason, it is because you are…

You might be surprised at just how little I care that there is some "logical" reason that preventing me from marrying whomever I love is worth $1000 to Brendan Eich.
Post reply on HN