Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.
Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.
Last edited by rabbitcaebannog; 04-06-14 at 07:26 AM.
Lol, I just came across this article and want to ask if conservatives are in or out? Put your outrage to work-
Here's the question: Simply put, if conservatives are frustrated by the treatment of Eich for his role in Proposition 8, then they should be outraged by the treatment of ordinary people at the hands of the people who employ them.
Snip- Mozilla and Brendan Eich’s resignation: Why don’t conservatives want to protect ordinary people from discrimination?
"But let’s grant that Sullivan and the National Review are right. That Eich’s forced resignation is an attack on speech, and that this is an ugly bout of bullying against someone who hasn’t expressed his views in the context of his job. If that’s true, then Eich is just the highest profile victim of a status quo that threatens countless workers.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act might protect workers from discrimination on the basis of their race, color, religion, sex, age, or national origin, but almost everything else is fair game for private employers who want to get rid of workers. Not only can you be fired for your political views—for sporting the wrong bumper sticker on your car, for instance—or for being “sexually irresistible” to your boss, but in most states (29, to be precise), you can be fired for your sexual orientation or gender identification, no questions asked.
Overall, the large majority of Americans have at-will employment, which means that—outside of protected classes such as race or religion—they can be fired for any reason at all. For someone like Eich, this isn’t a huge deal: He will survive his brush with joblessness. The same can’t be said for millions of low-income workers who face termination lest they give their bosses their complete obedience.
For a taste of what this looks like, and if you’ve never worked a retail job, you should read former Politico reporter Joseph Williams on his time in a sporting goods store. For a pittance of a paycheck, he consented to constant searches, unpaid labor, and borderline wage theft. It’s a precarious existence, made worse by the fact that saying the wrong thing at the wrong time—either on the job or off it—could result in you losing your job, with no recourse.
And of course, employment discrimination against LGBT Americans is a real and ongoing problem. According to a 2011 report from the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, at least 15 percent of gay Americans have faced discrimination and harassment at the workplace on the basis of their orientation, and at least 8 percent report being passed over for a job or fired. A whopping 90 percent of transgender individuals report some sort of harassment on the job. It’s doesn’t minimize Eich’s situation (if you’re opposed to his resignation) to note that gay people are far more likely to face discrimination than opponents of same-sex marriage.
In any case, there’s nothing conservatives can do about Eich’s resignation. But they can join with labor activists and others to push for greater worker protections, like the Employee Non-Discrimination Act. For as much as employer flexibility is important to a dynamic economy, it’s also true that no one should fear firing for the people they love, the identity they claim, or the donations they make.
Simply put, if conservatives are frustrated by the treatment of Eich for his role in Proposition 8, then they should be outraged by the treatment of ordinary people at the hands of the people who employ them."
One of you will end up here next!
It's a good thing to change your mind. If Obama was against gay marriage before the election (I doubt it but it doesn't matter) then he's changed his mind, and has a record now, and a quite extensive one, of fighting for gay rights, including a repeal of DADT which is probably the biggest barrier for LGBT in the Federal government and therefore under his jurisdiction. He's also pushed for, and as far as I know enacted, regulations that give same sex couples federal benefits on par with heterosexuals. So Obama has a LONG history now in the highest position of government of direct ACTION on behalf of and in support of LGBT. When it mattered, and he had ultimate authority, Obama was on their side. Why in the world would anyone hold an opinion he might have held six years ago against him now?
Eich is part of an organization that treats it's gay employees by all accounts very well, so he can rightly claim that he has a record of supporting them AT WORK. But he wasn't CEO then, and he also has a history of action that would reduce gay rights and maintain their PRIVATE relationships as second class, and he's never waffled on that position. It's that last part that's key. Where did he say his gay employees deserve equal rights outside of work? He hasn't, and that's a key distinction between Eich and Obama (and Hillary AFAIK).
I've read accounts by Mozilla employees who admire Eich, but understand why he left. Essentially it comes down to 1) not waffling on his support for Prop 8, OR 2) not really even trying to explain the disconnect between supporting LGBT rights in the workforce, but also supporting efforts to reduce their rights to second class in their private lives.
The argument is this:
Mozilla certainly had the right to request his resignation, because, as has been pointed out repeatedly, it would be impossible for him to be effective in his job, in light of the campaign against him. There is no claim that his rights were violated, or that new laws need to be made.
Its the nature of the campaign that was objectionable. There were no claims that his job performance was tainted by his opposition to same sex marriage. No claims that, in 2008 as he was writing out his $1000 check, or that in any year, he was purging gays on the job, or creating a hostile workplace. He was not advocating his opposition on the job, or indeed to co-workers off job time. Nobody seemed to know of his opposition. He was a man who showed up to work everyday and did his job well, and who in the judgement of the Board of directors, was quite suitable for the job of CEO.
He had a personal opinion at odds with many employees of Mozilla. And they would not tolerate it.
And their lack of tolerance is the problem.