Mozillagate grows

I’d written yesterday about the new CEO of the Mozilla Foundation, the parent organization of the Firefox Internet browser, among other things.

His name is Brendan Eich, and he proudly donated $1,000 to Proposition 8 in California, the successful Mormon-led ballot measure that repealed the right of gay couples to marry in that state in 2008.

Fortunately, last year, the Supreme Court finally put Prop 8 to bed once and for all, and marriage equality is now the law of the land again in California.

Brendan Eich, official Mozilla Foundation photo

Brendan Eich, official Mozilla Foundation photo

Back to Mozilla…  When Eich’s contribution became known last year, before his appointment as the new CEO, he penned a sad-puppy blog post about how hurt he was that anyone would consider his financial donation to gay-haters as evidence that he, you know, hates gay.

The donation does not in itself constitute evidence of animosity. Those asserting this are not providing a reasoned argument, rather they are labeling dissenters to cast them out of polite society. To such assertions, I can only respond: “no”.

Actually, he should have said “no” when asked to contribute to an incredibly bigoted and hateful cause, an effort to harm gay families, many with children, across California. But he didn’t.

Yesterday, in the face of growing anger from within Mozilla itself, Eich penned another blog post, this time about “Inclusiveness at Mozilla.” It read in part:

firefox-logoA number of Mozillians, including LGBT individuals and allies, have stepped forward to offer guidance and assistance in this. I cannot thank you enough, and I ask for your ongoing help to make Mozilla a place of equality and welcome for all. Here are my commitments, and here’s what you can expect:

  • Active commitment to equality in everything we do, from employment to events to community-building.
  • Working with LGBT communities and allies, to listen and learn what does and doesn’t make Mozilla supportive and welcoming.
  • My ongoing commitment to our Community Participation Guidelines, our inclusive health benefits, our anti-discrimination policies, and the spirit that underlies all of these.
  • My personal commitment to work on new initiatives to reach out to those who feel excluded or who have been marginalized in ways that makes their contributing to Mozilla and to open source difficult. More on this last item below.

I know some will be skeptical about this, and that words alone will not change anything. I can only ask for your support to have the time to “show, not tell”; and in the meantime express my sorrow at having caused pain.

He continues:

I am committed to ensuring that Mozilla is, and will remain, a place that includes and supports everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, age, race, ethnicity, economic status, or religion.

But Eich doesn’t believe in our most basic civil rights, and what’s worse, he’s an anti-gay activist (that’s the term the religious right would, “activist,” for anyone on our side who donated $1,000 to any gay cause).  How exactly is an anti-gay activist going to prove his commitment to our equality when at a very basic level he doesn’t believe in our equality?

The guy doesn’t get it.  He really thinks he’s done nothing wrong, that he’s done nothing to suggest that he has a problem with gay people.  Except he really has.

But okay, it’s been six years.  I’m game. Has Eich suddenly changed his mind? Is he now in favor of gay marriage? Has he made a $1,000 donation to a pro-“gay marriage” cause that we somehow all missed?

What exactly has changed between then and now?  Other than the fact that Brendan Eich really wants to keep his plum new job.

(I’m told that in order to better see my Facebook posts in your feed, you need to “follow” me.)

Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

65 Responses to “Mozillagate grows”

  1. sane37 says:

    He has already discriminated against the LBGT by donating $1000 to ensure they were discriminated against. He spent $1000 to ensure the law would support his bigotry.
    He deserves recognized for the bigot he is.

    Who cares? Only people who believe in equality and decency.
    Not you, apparently.

  2. kurtsteinbach says:

    Well, I guess our efforts work. This POS resigned today under pressure from within Mozilla and from users…. Victory!

  3. goulo says:

    Just ran across the following blog entry from an ex-Mozilla employee:
    “I can’t agree to disagree on the question of whether I’m a person under the law.”

  4. Nick says:

    How much did Brendan pay you to post that? He destroyed the hopes and dreams of basic human equality for families and children. Prop 8 was nothing but pure, unadulterated hatred of gays and their families.

  5. MIRЯIM says:

    Did you know that Google Inc. is the number one donor to the Mozilla Foundation? Google Inc. provides the Mozilla Foundation with nearly ALL of its funding. Since Mozilla is turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to our concerns, perhaps it’s time to take it up with their money-bag, Google Inc?

  6. davidinchelseama says:

    I don’t usually like ad hominem attacks, but in this case, it’s warranted. You’re a frigging idiot.
    If someone is against gay people, or Jewish people, or black people, or Irish people, or any other people, having the same civil rights as others, they don’t deserve employment, in MY opinion. Does every employer have to agree with my opinion on this? NO. Mozilla has every right to hire whomever they like, and we have every right to boycott Mozilla.

  7. Eric L. says:

    So because he donated money to Prop 8 he deserves to be fired? What kind of logic is that? He has stated that he will not discriminate against LGBT people as CEO. If there is evidence to the contrary later, then I agree he would deserve the boot. As it stands right now, who cares? He’s bound by the laws of California and the policies of his company. Let’s save the lynch mob for someone that really deserves it. Shall we?

  8. kurtsteinbach says:

    Well, he says Mozilla has LGBTQ employees. Will he fire any of them? I mean I get that he created java or something and they want someone like that working for them, but considering Mozilla is free and open source, promoting an anti-LGBT employee to be CEO, basically the face of Mozilla, was ill-conceived because it flies in the face of the “free” part of Mozilla’s mission, but then, Conservatives like Eich usually fail to comprehend such parallels….

  9. Thom Allen says:

    Here’s Eich’s latest “statement.” HE explains that Firefox is inclusive. And he demonstrates how LGBTQ friendly he is by saying that they have partner benefits that THEY WILL MAINTAIN. WOW, THAT’S progressive. He’s not going to revoke partner benefits. I guess he really DOES support LGBTQs.

    And, he won’t tolerate any bigotry directed against Mozilla employees by other Mozilla employees. He, himself a bigot, will determine if bigotry exists or not. It brings a tear to my eye to see how he’s “progressed” from those anti-gay days.

  10. Swami_Binkinanda says:

    That’s what NoScript is for.

  11. BeccaM says:

    Bottom line #2: If Eich supports gay rights at all, why did he donate $2100 over the course of two years to one of the most vehemently anti-gay Republicans in the House of Representatives, Tom McClintock (R CA-4)?

    And as a follow-up: “Mr. Eich, are there any of Representative McClintock’s positions or votes you disagree with? Do you agree with McClintock that gay marriage should be banned by Constitutional amendment? How about McClintock’s position there should be no hate crimes laws protecting gay people? If you do disagree with him on these kinds of issues, why did you donate repeatedly to his campaign?”

    Hell, these are just the gay-related questions. McClintock has all kinds of far-right positions, including his vote against renewing the Violence Against Women Act. At this point, I’d like to ask Eich to explain why we shouldn’t conclude he’s a far-right conservative Republican who merely says what he thinks is ‘politically correct’ for corporate PR reasons.

  12. caphillprof says:

    The question is not should they be unemployable, but should they be awarded with leadership.

    The right has already raised the bar even higher. What do you think all this Hobby Lobby, anti-gay wedding cake bakers and florists are all about

  13. caphillprof says:

    At the moment I am the voluntary president of a nonprofit with more than 2,000 members. Because I represent the organization and it’s diverse membership, I find I am more circumspect in my personal opinions. This rarely seems to be a consideration for Republicans.

  14. KipC says:

    Bottom Line: Does Eich support same-sex marriage equality today or not? That’s all I need to know. And if he now does support us, then I’d like to see him give 1,000 dollars to Oregon United For Marriage or a similar group.

    And if he does not support marriage equality then everything else he says is B.S. and he needs to go. Because anti-gay bigotry is sick and the issue will not go away. You are not for equal rights if you don’t support our right to marry. Period.

  15. BeccaM says:

    Definitely ‘or something.’ ;-)

  16. BeccaM says:

    That’s just the thing: There are NO listed donations from Eich, as registered with the FEC, to any pro-gay politicians.

    Just the four Republicans. And McClintock, the one to whom Eich gave the most money, is the most anti-gay one of the bunch.

  17. jomicur says:

    Hey, give him a break. He’s being intolerant for not tolerating our intolerance of the fact that he’s not tolerant. Or something.

  18. taikan says:

    Actions speak louder than words.

    As long as his post-2008 donations to Tom McClintock are not balanced by an equal or greater amount of donations to politicians who openly support gay marriage, any apology he makes with respect to his donation to support the passage of Prop 8 should be viewed as nothing more than mere words.

  19. jomicur says:

    How long before he starts claiming “I have a lot of gay friends”?

  20. PeteWa says:

    thanks, that was not registering with me.

  21. TheAngryFag says:

    You hit the nail on the head. That’s what folks think the Chik-fil-a thing was all about too; Dan Cathy running his mouth. But it was him opening his wallet to organizations that were advocating kidnapping children of gay parents among other such lovely topics.

  22. BeccaM says:

    His political donations would seem to indicate he hasn’t.

  23. BeccaM says:

    Brilliant find! I expanded upon it in a comment above. By my count, Eich has donated $2100 to McClintock in donations ranging from $200 to $300 over the course of two years, ’08 to ’10.

  24. Olterigo says:

    I think, if he would have changed his mind, he’d clearly state that.

  25. BeccaM says:

    As Marek noted below, he went to the FEC website and pulled up the donations for Brendan Eich, which are required to be reported by law. In addition to a $1500 donation to the Ron Paul re-election campaign in ’98, Eich has given to three other candidates — all Republicans.

    Two were small donations to Charles Ball and Linda Smith. But since 2008, Eich has been a steady and reliable donor to Rep. Tom McClintock (CA-4, Republican), to the tune of $2000 over the course of two years, 2008 to 2010.

    McClintock is considered to be a far-right conservative by

    According to, McClintock was declared by Redstate (website) to be one of the sixteen Republican “Conservative Fight Club” members, for his continued votes to shut down the federal government last year and to keep it shut down.

    McClintock is solidly anti-immigrant, anti-gay (as in NO rights for gays whatsoever), anti-abortion (or any reproductive rights), for continued wage freezes for federal employees, in favor of repealing ACA (of course), and right on down the line.

    The American Conservative Union gave McClintock a perfect 100% score in 2013, which was shared by only 14 other Republican House members.

    On his own website, Tom McClintock referred to the 2008 California Supreme Court decision to permit gay marriage in the state “a travesty.”

    Later, when asked about Prop 8, he had this to say:

    “Lincoln asked, ‘If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? The
    answer is four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it one. And calling a
    homosexual partnership a marriage doesn’t make it one.”

    And finally, last June when the Prop 8 and DOMA U.S. Supreme Court decisions came down, McClintock was part of the Republican group who vowed to pass a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage throughout the country. At the announcement, McClintock referred to the SCOTUS decision as “ideologically driven and legally inconsistent.”

    How many people do you know who donate to the campaigns of politicians whose positions they don’t agree with?

  26. Ron Robertson says:

    When you stand up to people trying to remove your rights, or put you in second-class citizen status, THAT IS NOT BULLYING. That is standing up for yourself. We have the RIGHT and the OBLIGATION to point out that people in prominent positions actively have sought to harm us. It does not sound from his non-apology apology that he regrets his Prop 8 support at all.

    And his is not just some job, he’s the CEO! He represents the entire company. An employee isn’t necessarily thought to represent an entire company when it’s a large one.

    World Visions changed to refuse to hire MARRIED gay people, after pressure from the religious right-wing fucks.

    And, our rights are not a DEBATE. Eich is not being told he cannot have his views, he’s being held accountable for them.

    There are not 2 sides to everything, and when there are, both sides don’t carry the same weight. Eich is wrong, has not shown that he even slightly understands how wrong he was, and is not credible. The religious people you’re excusing are trying to force their views on their employees. That’s what Hobby Lobby is about. You can’t be too bright if you don’t see that. But I really suspect you’re just astroturfing or are paid for your bullshit.

  27. GarySFBCN says:

    What are you rambling about? There are MANY browsers that can be used.

  28. Mark_in_MN says:

    You push this farther than appropriate or necessary. There is a difference between having a job, even a fairly well paying one, and being the CEO of a company with a fairly large revenue and some significance within its sector.

  29. Meh says:

    I recommend you start your protest by avoiding any websites that use javascript – that’ll tell it like it is – meh

  30. Allan Orr says:

    Ugh I wish I could myself, but it’s the only current browser that works with the java app I need to use to submit my monthly business activity statements. IE hasn’t worked since 6 with it, and we all know how holey it’s security is and the efficiency stinks.

  31. BeccaM says:

    Oh, I don’t think donations to Tom McClintock muddy things at all. In fact, I’d say it makes Eich’s political views even more clear.

    Rep. McClintock: Republican. Anti-immigrant. English-only teaching. Education vouchers instead of public schools. 100% anti-gay rights. Against high-speed rail. Favors privatization. Wants to abolish punitive damages except in criminal cases. Favors absolute gun rights and ‘stand your ground’ laws. Opposes overtime pay and worker’s comp.

    And I see Eich donated $1500 to re-elect Ron Paul in ’98.

    In fact, according to Marek’s link, Eich has donated only to Republican candidates.

  32. HKDaniel says:

    He’s claiming to not be a bigot, I’d rather give him a chance to prove it and gain a new ally. If he can’t/won’t THEN he can be thrown to the dogs.

  33. BeccaM says:

    I read his blog post from yesterday, and it’s funny how he says he wants to “show, not tell” — but that’s all the post does.

    He says he’s sorry for causing pain, but does not identify why it happened, nor does he say a single word about the context involved — namely marriage equality. He takes no actual responsibility for his actions.

    His ‘inclusiveness’ post talks a pretty line about respecting LGBT folks, but to date he still has not disavowed his opposition to marriage equality.

    That in my book leaves him still standing in the “I have nothing against gay people, but…” group.

    Only in the 2012 post does he directly address what he actually did, and clearly doesn’t feel at all sorry for it.

  34. Julien Pierre says:

    This is a little bit more muddy, though. I don’t know about you, but I never endorse 100% of the agenda of the people I vote for, or even the one candidate I ever donated to. There are always some agreements and disagreements.

  35. Julien Pierre says:

    That’s an excellent example of what he could do.

    Perhaps it would be better to quote his latest blog post, yesterday, rather than his 2012 non-apology.

  36. Sweetie says:

    Honestly, I don’t care much about his position on this issue because bigoted men like him are a dime a dozen in the corporate CEO class and I’ve heard all their BS a million times. What I do care about is seeing a different type of person (non-bigot) get jobs like this. Plenty of deserving people are out there.

  37. Sweetie says:

    Me, either. I prefer that bigots have good jobs while non-bigots are struggling in this economy. Hello, compassion!

  38. Sweetie says:

    “A reminder of PedoBear’s personal choices years ago is unfair and violates the core values of the K-5 community.”

    “A reminder of Son of Sam’s personal choices years ago is unfair and violates the core values of the WolvesForSheep community.”

  39. Julien Pierre says:

    A majority of the California electorate in november 2008 voted for prop 8, but contributing to “Yes on 8” is one step further, which most did not take. Can you see the difference ?

    I saw the “Yes on 8” TV ads, and believe they were very deceitful. The electorate was deceived, IMO. Anyone who contributed to that campaign should be ashamed. Sadly, the “No on 8” campaign didn’t even attempt to debunk anything that was in the “Yes” ads, and IMO this is why Prop 8 passed.

    This has nothing to do with the Hobby Lobby case whatsoever.

  40. BeccaM says:

    Here’s how you apologize:

    “In 2008, I donated money in support of passing Prop 8. As many would have guessed, I also voted in favor of the measure. At the time, I believed that civil marriage should be reserved only for heterosexual couples. I also mistakenly believed that marriage needed to be ‘protected’ from gay and lesbian families.

    “Obviously, that meant even when I said I believed in equal rights for gays and lesbians, I didn’t actually. It should’ve been clear to me then that I thought their families weren’t the same as or as good as families headed by opposite sex couples. I also totally ignored the effect a marriage ban would have on the children already being raised by gay and lesbian parents.

    “I was one of those people who would say, ‘I have nothing against gay people but…’ And I’m here today to say I’m ashamed to have held those positions, and to have had such a huge blind spot when it came to acceptance and respect for LGBT people.

    “Since 2008, my eyes have been opened, as has my heart. I now realize that you don’t ‘protect’ a civil right by limiting to only certain groups. I realize that gay and lesbian couples and their families deserve the exact same rights as other families. If I could take back that donation and that vote, I would. But since I can’t, I’ll show you rather than tell you that my heart has changed on this. In 2008, I donated a thousand dollars to the pro-Prop 8 campaign. I am donating $10,000 today to the Lambda Legal Defense Fund and another $10,000 to the Freedom to Marry organization.

    “I know this can’t make up for the mistakes I made, but I hope it does show the sincerity of both my change of heart and of my apology to everyone I hurt though my actions. Thank you.”

    Here’s how you don’t apologize, and in fact make it clear that an apology is the last thing on your mind:

    The donation does not in itself constitute evidence of animosity.
    Those asserting this are not providing a reasoned argument, rather they
    are labeling dissenters to cast them out of polite society. To such
    assertions, I can only respond: “no”.

  41. Sweetie says:

    Gotta love Glazman:

    “”A reminder of Brendan’s personal choices years ago is unfair and violates the core values of the Mozilla community.”

    hahahahahaha… how dare you bring up his bigotry?

  42. craigkg says:

    C-level jobs = CEO, CFO, CTO, etc.

  43. Julien Pierre says:

    Honestly, I don’t wish for him to step down, but I do wish he would talk
    about his past support and tell whether he has changed his mind on the

  44. GarySFBCN says:

    “It’s no different than hounding a gay guy out of a job at a Catholic school which we rightly call an unjustifiable witch hunt.”

    Bullshit. While it is regrettable that a gay guy lost his job at a Catholic school, everyone knows the church is homophobic and there is some risk of being axed for being gay.

    Here we have a newly appointed CEO who is anti-gay. Had he been ‘anti-Jewish’ he never would have been appointed. And this isn’t a difference of opinion – as if there are two valid and moral sides to the “issue” of being gay. No, this is hatred.

    We’ve had to fight for almost every right we’ve gained and now is not the time to ease up because of some idiotic ideology or ‘concern’.

  45. BeccaM says:

    Oh, and one thing more: You say you’re a married gay man living in California — and yet to make your point about us LGBTs being nasty bullies, you quote the American Conservative? A publication that was itself 100% unanimously in favor of Prop 8 and against overturning DOMA?

    The same site that often publishes the incoherent screeds of Patrick Buchanan himself?

    That ‘American Conservative’? I mean, c’mon! The “You’re being intolerant for not tolerating our bigotry’ is old hat at this point.

  46. GarySFBCN says:

    Here is the issue:

    Supporting prop 8 = being anti-gay.

    Mozilla would NEVER have hired anyone who was anti-Jewish, anti-black and they sure as hell shouldn’t have hired this CEO because he is anti-gay.

    He has to be fired. I believe that he will ‘step down’ because of the controversy.

  47. BeccaM says:

    No. All we’re demanding is for Eich to apologize for financially supporting the effort to permanently consign gay and lesbian families to second-class status. To admit he was wrong. To admit that his latest protestations of full-throated support for LGBT rights are at odds with his previous concrete actions.

    So far, he has not done this. Indeed, he has claimed the opposite, that his “donation does not itself constitute evidence of animosity.”

    Bullshit. Gay and lesbian couples had been enjoying marriage equality rights in California for half a year. EQUALITY. The very thing Eich now claims he stands for. Then he donated a thousand bucks to help take away that right. That money was then used to try to convince others to vote against gay rights, too.

    There is no reason other than animus for wanting to do so. Inside him is the belief that same-sex couples should not be permitted the rights of civil marriage, enough such that he cut a check for it.

    Is there any doubt the man who now says he’s totally behind LGBT rights scribbled the circle next to YES on the ballot for Prop 8 in 2008? I’d wager the same $1000 bucks that he did.

    And now he wants to pretend it didn’t matter, that his donation in no way reflected his actual feelings towards gays and lesbians. His attitudes are just as repugnant as anybody who says, “I have nothing against gay people, but…” — who then follow that with something that says they actually DO have something against gay people.

    In Eich’s case, it’s marriage rights. He thinks we don’t deserve legal protections for our families. Or thought so in 2008. Since he’s still excusing his donation, I have to wonder if he still feels that way. “I have nothing against gay people…but they don’t deserve to get married.”

    I can deal with people who change their minds. Whose attitudes evolve. Whose sense of acceptance and inclusiveness grows over time. Eich, however, wants it both ways — total forgiveness for his donation and never have to explain why he feels or felt that gay and lesbian families don’t deserve equality.

  48. BeccaM says:

    Co-founded, along with a bunch of other people. Eich was chief architect for the newly spun-off Mozilla project — which at the time was expected to fail, since it had no business model and had just been abandoned by AOL after its Netscape acquisition.

  49. Lyram says:

    Would he get away with this behavior if this were about inter-racial marriage? No. It would have been better for him to say something like, ‘I’ve changed and grown in the years since that donation, and regret it.’ But instead his response was arrogant. He should not have been promoted. But now that he has, he needs to be watched.

  50. Dave says:

    It isn’t a “witch hunt” because witches didn’t actually exist. Eich exists and no one disputes that he financially backed a measure to strip away the constitutional rights of LGB Californians, including LGB employees of Mozilla.

    This is not about personal views or speech. He funded a measure that 2 federal courts have held to be discriminatory and a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. A further 14 federal courts have held the same with respect to other measures similar or identical to Prop 8. It was his right to do so, but it is entirely fair to ask Mozilla why this wasn’t considered in selecting its CEO – its face to the world.

  51. Ricky says:

    Whose rights did he have taken away that had been granted by the courts? On this magical blog of his – did he manage to have the rights of Catholics taken away as punishment for their being Catholic?

  52. PeteWa says:

    he founded Mozilla and yet has only held c-level jobs there?
    how strange.

  53. Julien Pierre says:

    No, it’s not the same thing.

    A blog post is merely expressing an opinion.

    A donation is far more active involvement.

  54. PeteWa says:

    no, it’s not the same thing.
    are you the master of false equivalences?

    I could care less if this asshat would actually write on his personal blog about how icky he thinks gay marriage is, it’s the fact that he has contributed to efforts to rescind rights and contributed to have his fellow asshat elected:—-n.html

    all anyone is saying is that given who Mozilla purports to be (I know, LOL), hiring this guy was not exactly the wisest choice.
    you can continue to fight for the intolerant, that’s not what I’m interested in doing.

  55. nicho says:

    I hope everyone realizes that he wasn’t “hired” and won’t be fired. He founded the company and has held several C-level jobs there. He just switched from one C-level job to another.

  56. Ricky says:

    Are you kidding – he did not simply oppose the right of Gays and Lesbians to marry – they were already granted the right by the courts – he contributed to an effort to rescind that right – yes, he looked at the happy joyous faces of Gays and Lesbians finally allowed to marry and he sought to stop that happiness through legislation – don’t you DARE lecture us about what this is about.
    As for the majority – California is a state of 33 million people – 6 million voted against Prop 8 and 6.5 million voted in favor of it – so 500,000 people in a state of 33 million — decide that Gays and Lesbians should have the right to marry TAKEN AWAY – and while you may be fine with that – again, don’t you dare lecture the rest of us about what a bully is.
    What Eich did is a lot more sinister and ugly than simply not supporting Same Sex Marriage – and yes, he should be held accountable.

  57. HKDaniel says:

    I don’t want this guy to lose his job over this.

    I do want him to provide proof that his rhetoric is more than damage control. If he’s so for equality and inclusion why hasn’t he taken any steps to advance equality and inclusion?

    Until we see some real, genuine effort on that he’s just another bigot trying to hide his bigotry with a disingenuous call for ‘respecting all opinions’. That bull has to stop, it’s more offensive than his donation. Equality is equality and no amount of rhetorical wriggling will change draconian anti-equality, exclusionary bigotry into ‘just another opinion’.

  58. EyeTee says:

    So when the Catholic school (In Ohio? PA? not sure) fired the vice principal- straight ally for writing on his personal blog that he supported marriage equality, you were totally fine with that. Same thing,

  59. PeteWa says:

    “We are becoming the intolerant bullies that the right wing accuses us of being.”
    by calling someone on their bullshit?
    yeah, um, no.

  60. bkmn says:

    I understand your view but in this case Eich is the CEO of a large internet company. His actions years ago substantially hurt many people in California. It is his responsibility to do something substantially more to show that he no longer wants to strip rights away from people.

    At a minimum, someone in his well paid position could make a donation to Lambda Legal. All he has done is give lip service to try to refute his past actions.

  61. EyeTee says:

    Disagree with this. And I speak as a passionate opponent of Prop8, and a married gay Californian.

    It’s no different than hounding a gay guy out of a job at a Catholic school which we rightly call an unjustifiable witch hunt. There is no evidence that EIch is using his position against LGBT people. He is entitled to personal political beliefs and speech, even if we don’t like them. This sort of purity cult of banning speech we disagree with is wrong.

    Are we as a community saying that people who supported Prop8 (a majority of California voters in 2006) shouldn’t ahve jobs? that they should be unemployable? REALLY?

    By this logic, if my employer didn’t like my marriage equality advocacy, he could fire me, even if I do nothing whatsoever at work about marriage equality. (And this is really what the whole Hobby Lobby case is about.)

    Are we no different than World Visions refusing to hire LGBT people?

    We are becoming the intolerant bullies that the right wing accuses us of being. This is political correctness run amok.

    As Leah Libresco writes in the American Conservative , “This exclusionary approach raises the stakes of political conflict dangerously high. When the losing side of a debate is blacklisted, all disputes become wars of annihilation.”

  62. PeteWa says:

    that’s putting it mildly, bub.

  63. marek says:

    It looks like he donated a lot more than $1,000 to anti-gay politician, Tom McClintock

  64. Naja pallida says:

    I can accept that his position may have “evolved”. But he obviously felt so strongly against equal rights that he donated money to help fight it. So, if he really has changed his mind, he needs to do something concrete in the other direction to prove it. All the letters of apology, boiler-plate assurances, and mealy-mouth corporate-speak mean absolutely nothing. He needs to put his money where his mouth is.

  65. kabulate says:

    John: I urge you to keep investigating this story and writing about it. My husband and I have already removed Firefox and we want to urge everyone else who cares about equality to do the same.

© 2020 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS