“I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.
What has happened supposedly to "Log cabin Republican's" or to an editor for writing an editorial, doesn't justify an outside group pressuring a company to fire someone for donating to a cause, 10 years ago, that they don't like.
The two are not comparable in a rational sense.
BTW, I suppose then that anti-gay bigotry is at "the heart" of the conservative movement so banning gay GOP groups is OK?
By the way, I'm vocally and non-apologetically in favor of gay marriage, and I'm a conservative. I think every consenting adult should have the right to marry if they chose. Polygamists, gay people, siblings, whoever.
And I am fully in support of the protest they launched. I'm still not clear on what they wanted the end effect to be though. What did they want? They didn't say that the Mozilla culture was anti-gay, or that gay employees were treated unfairly, so there's seemingly nothing to change there. Did they just want Eich to be punished for doing something that offended them?
I'm talking about the double standard being set in how they actively fund and support organizations that contribute significantly to Republican candidates, and that lobby against universal health care and climate change legislation. If any CEO supports certain political agenda's should they be held accountable? I don't care what the issue is, if you allow no expression of opinions by threat of punishment, that will become a principle that works both ways.
You have to be careful what you wish for because you might just get it.
Einstein, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."