- Joined
- Sep 9, 2011
- Messages
- 13,745
- Reaction score
- 8,546
- Location
- North 38°28′ West 121°26′
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
I see. I really need to learn more about the details in this case. Based on what I know I disagree with him being forced out of his job.
If his actions within the organization had been consistently and widely in conflict with the stated mission of the company than I could understand it. But it doesn't appear they have been. It actually appears that despite his personal opinion he has helped to build a company that actively promotes inclusion and accessibility. If this is all there is to it,then I think it may be an over-reaction.
We can't know every opinion someone holds and we can't assume that anyone will act contrary to a companies mission just because their personal opinion is different no matter how much power or authority they have within that organization.
People should be free to think what they want no matter how messed up it is but how they behave is another matter.
What is with all the numbering of my statements, anyways? I suppose it's easier than quoting individual sections...1.) a bit underhanded? lol come one now. If this was done to you or your family id guess you call it more than that "bit underhanded"
do you have kids? if this was done to one of them and the only reason they did it is because of thier race, gender, religion, origin etc etc im "guessing" youd call it a little more than that
2.) yes if that was the choice id probably agree but luckily this isnt russia, its america where we have rights and they are being protected
3.) this is true but its a dumb step to take when its not needed. Equal rights is winning
Obama clearly states he's against gay marriage while running for the Presidency.
1.) link, proof, facts?
Brendan Eich - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaBrendan Eich (/ˈaɪk/; born 1961)[SUP][1][/SUP] is an American computer programmer and creator of the JavaScript scripting language. He cofounded Mozilla, briefly becoming the chief executive officer before resigning on April 3, 2014.[SUP][2][/SUP]
His pro LGBT stance. Seems like you've not bothered to read his blog post or my quoting of it in this forum. I'd suggest to go back and do so.2.) evidence of what?
As a founder, the organization is a direct reflection of his values and value system, as the way he leads. His actions speak louder than your indictment against him as a bigot.3.) yes he was a co founder :shrug:
4.) links? facts? proof?
like i said there have been judges, politicians, cops etc etc that have been found to be bigots and were leaders in hate groups or donated to hate groups or were in the KKK etc etc
and while they did thier jobs they did it with in the law, never doing anythign bigoted while on duty, that has ZERO impact on them being a bigot
ZERO, ZILCH, NOTA, NONE
why would it?
can you explain why it impacts that fact one bit?
are you saying if he was a KKK member but founder of Mozilla who had friendly minority policies and he never practiced racism at work that magically makes him not a bigot? LOL i hope not because thats hilariously terrible logic.
Freedom of speech means letting the assholes speak their minds.A recent remake of Planet of the Apes contained a perfect depiction of a modern American liberal…
View attachment 67164475
Actually I'm not certain which way its going. It seems that there has been a sequence of actions here where the IRS has been involved though I'm not clear on how that may conflict with California law..Might be, but doesn't make sense. From what has been posted in this thread any political donation in California of $1K or more is recorded and made public. So why would the IRS have to release any information if it's public already?
Being for traditional marriage doesn't mean someone is anti-Gay. This man apparently treated gays with respect with nothing in his past that showed any bias whatsoever but he drew the line at marriage.
Soon there will be the same debate regarding polygamy. Should those who are not for polygamous marriages be called 'bigots' because they disagree with the idea?
What do any of these questions have to do with anything? I freely admit to being human. I have acted out of bigotry in life I have suffered the consequences just like everyone else. I currently do not hold any bigoted views.
The CEO never stated that he regrets the donation. So as far as any one is concerned he is still convinced the homosexuals should be barred from marriage and thus he is still a bigot.
1.)are you claiming marriage isnt in a right? i hope not because youd be factually wrong lol
It is against the law and all laws are guided by the constitution.is the right not to be raped in the constitution?
3.) you are free to have this opinion but thats all it will ever be lol
Oh don't try to bring up logic in this debate by asking a question about polygamy, they won't hear you, their hands are over their ears.
But you see it works this way with those in that camp: If you can change the definition of "gay" to mean homosexual. Then why stop at the definition of "bigotry"? Didn't you get the memo? Bigotry now means disagreement.
1.)What is with all the numbering of my statements, anyways? I suppose it's easier than quoting individual sections...
2.)I agree that the trend seems to be towards allowing equal rights/gay marriage/same sex marriage/whateveryoucallit.
3.)I figured this could be a shortcut, but whatever.
4.)I wouldn't put it past some areas to hold out for a long time.
You're gonna have to do better than a copy of a questionnaire claimed by whom?
Let me guess... Dan Rather?
Sigh. Here we go again.*snip*
If "normal" means voting against someone else's relationship, then yes.
Oh don't try to bring up logic in this debate by asking a question about polygamy, they won't hear you, their hands are over their ears.
But you see it works this way with those in that camp: If you can change the definition of "gay" to mean homosexual. Then why stop at the definition of "bigotry"? Didn't you get the memo? Bigotry now means disagreement.
Freedom of speech means letting the assholes speak their minds.
I answered the question about polygamy waaaay back in the thread.
The race isn't even a relevant factor.
They've overused the term 'fascist', which is what they called anyone who disagreed with them, then 'racist', now 'bigot'. There are probably a few of their fashionable terms I missed along the way but the point is that they cannot have a real debate without using these hysterical terms. They are adolescents.
Yeah, wasn't relevant:
California's black and Latino voters, who turned out in droves for Barack Obama, also provided key support in favor of the state's same-sex marriage ban. Seven in 10 black voters backed a successful ballot measure to overturn the California Supreme Court's May decision allowing same-sex marriage, according to exit polls for The Associated Press.
More than half of Latino voters supported Proposition 8, while whites were split. Religious groups led the tightly organized campaign for the measure, and religious voters were decisive in getting it passed. Of the seven in 10 voters who described themselves as Christian, two-thirds backed the initiative. Married voters and voters with children strongly supported Proposition 8. Unmarried voters were heavily opposed.
Blacks = 70%
Christians = 66%
Liberals know that it's not politically correct to attacks blacks, so they remain silent instead and direct their attacks on the only group they've permitted themselves to attack - the Christians who they hate.
1.)Brendan Eich - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2.)His pro LGBT stance. Seems like you've not bothered to read his blog post or my quoting of it in this forum. I'd suggest to go back and do so.
3.)As a founder, the organization is a direct reflection of his values and value system, as the way he leads.
4.) His actions speak louder than your indictment against him as a bigot.
5.)It is a well known leadership principal that the culture and values of the organization are a reflection of the leader's values. If you doubt that, I'd suggest reading a few books on leadership.
6.)And here you are trying to tell me that regardless of how a person acts professionally and the leadership example he sets, he's still a bigot until your are satisfied that he's not?
7.) Who made you judge and jury?
8.) By that same logic, I can accuse you of being a bigot and you are until you prove otherwise.
9.)That's pretty much McCarthyism right there.
10.) Plan to hold Senate hearing too?
Why would it bother you to know that Blacks and Hispanics share similar family values with the conservative whites?
Is being normal such a bad thing?
1.)Marriage is not a 'right' If you can show that it is please point it out.
2.)It is against the law and all laws are guided by the constitution.
My opinion tends to be formed by facts.
Sigh. Here we go again.