• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mozilla’s CEO steps down amid gay marriage furor[W:577]

The Left attacked Eich and following his departure from Mozilla then, and only then, did other people of every political hue, make an issue of it.

Um, people pro gay marriage did. A little honesty won't hurt when debating an issue.
 
I noted many times in this thread that I support the call to remove anti-discrimination statutes and allow companies to fire people for race, sex, sexual orientation and whatever other reason they please. I take it that you too support such exercises of freedom.

No, I don't.
 
Discrimination would appear to be in the eye of the beholder, which leaves a very broad interpretation.

No kidding. The double standards here stink to high heaven. Liberals can fire people for "valid" reasons but they declare invalid all sorts of other reasons to fire people.
 
Discrimination would appear to be in the eye of the beholder, which leaves a very broad interpretation.

Not when this is stated, "I noted many times in this thread that I support the call to remove anti-discrimination statutes and allow companies to fire people for race, sex, sexual orientation and whatever other reason they please."

Basically firing someone for race, sex or sexual orientation is discrimination based on those specific traits.
 
One of the things that has gone unmentioned in this thread so far is that objection to Eich among Mozilla's employee base was so severe that three board members quit after Eich's appointment as CEO.

Three Mozilla board members resign after Eich's appointment as CEO: report - San Francisco Business Times

One of them said:

“Mozilla has always been a messy place, and misunderstood,” said John Lilly, a former chief executive and former board member of Mozilla. “People on the outside can’t decide if it’s the United Nations, or Apple, or a nongovernmental organization, or a soup kitchen. It’s a hybrid, mission-driven organization.”
...
“This is playing out as a fight over free speech and equal rights, but that oversimplifies it,” he said. ‘This is about how organizations will process individual rights and free speech, and how leadership helps them think through that.”
...

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/05/t...d-change-inflamed-crisis-at-mozilla.html?_r=0

And from the NYT story:

Both Ms. Baker and Mr. Hoffman said that they tried to get Mr. Eich to remain in a senior position at Mozilla, but that he quit because he thought it would cause more harm to the company if he stayed. “He was the right person for all of the technical growth, but the other things steered into him hard,” Mr. Hoffman said. “He said, ‘My continuing is not good for me or the organization.’ ”

He wasn't forced out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/05/t...d-change-inflamed-crisis-at-mozilla.html?_r=0
 
One of the things that has gone unmentioned in this thread so far is that objection to Eich among Mozilla's employee base was so severe that three board members quit after Eich's appointment as CEO.

Three Mozilla board members resign after Eich's appointment as CEO: report - San Francisco Business Times

One of them said:



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/05/t...d-change-inflamed-crisis-at-mozilla.html?_r=0

And from the NYT story:



He wasn't forced out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/05/t...d-change-inflamed-crisis-at-mozilla.html?_r=0

Good find.
 
One of the things that has gone unmentioned in this thread so far is that objection to Eich among Mozilla's employee base was so severe that three board members quit after Eich's appointment as CEO.

Three Mozilla board members resign after Eich's appointment as CEO: report - San Francisco Business Times

One of them said:



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/05/t...d-change-inflamed-crisis-at-mozilla.html?_r=0

And from the NYT story:



He wasn't forced out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/05/t...d-change-inflamed-crisis-at-mozilla.html?_r=0

Those board members did not leave because of his stance on Prop 8. That is what the media is trying to portray.
 
In this particular instance it is the left who went after Eich.

No, the left voiced their opinions. That is still allowed in this country.
 
It most certainly does have something to do with his post, but whatever.

While, as I stated before, I think this is definitely overkill, this is different than "forcing someone out" (and we don't know exactly how that went down) because they "don't agree with your opinion" (the issue being that he actively donated money to suppress homosexuals). It's slightly more nuanced than that.

no it isn't he expressed an opinion.

should you be fired for expressing an opinion that someone disagree's with?

i say you shouldn't but according to you you should.
 
I wonder how many of the people who are lamenting Eich's departure at (what they claim was) the ruthless hands of the Gaystapo are the same people who cheerleaded the right-wing CEOs' not-so-veiled threats that voting for Obama might not be conducive to their continued employment.

One of them here: The CEO Who Built Himself America's Largest House Just Threatened to Fire His Employees if Obama's Elected

There was no threat tied to individual voting. Apples and oranges.:peace
 
The facts are that ANYBODY can get fired for saying anything about politics in or outside work. This is a problem for EVERYONE. This is not an us vs. them issue or a gay rights groups are evil issue. Until people want to put down their partisan swords nothing will change. Just same sh*t different day.

You say the problem applies to everyone, and yet you're highlighting a bill that applies only to discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. That fact seems to belie your intent.
 
no it isn't he expressed an opinion.

should you be fired for expressing an opinion that someone disagree's with?

i say you shouldn't but according to you you should.

He wasn't fired. Repeat: He wasn't fired. I do not know how many times I have to repeat that before people stop parroting that lie.
 
There was no threat tied to individual voting. Apples and oranges.:peace

However, it was a quite obvious attempt to bully his employees into not voting for Obama. I guess it's only OK when a "job creator" does it.
 
He wasn't fired. Repeat: He wasn't fired. I do not know how many times I have to repeat that before people stop parroting that lie.

He was forced to resign what difference is there. you either resign or we vote you out is the same choice. so yes in essence he was fired.
it isn't a lie. forced to resign fired pretty much the same thing.
 
However, it was a quite obvious attempt to bully his employees into not voting for Obama. I guess it's only OK when a "job creator" does it.

If anyone felt it was bullying then it was wrong. That would be an irrational reaction nonetheless. You are pushing a false equivalence. If he had demanded contributions to the Romney campaign you would have a point.:peace
 
He wasn't forced out.

Come on, be the sophisticated thinker you claim to be. These are post-hoc rationalizations/statements and this is standard for every organization. It usually involves the departing executive choosing to spend more time with his family. You know that to be true.

If the board was standing with Eich then we would have seen all of the board members making statements of support while the crisis was brewing. They would not tolerate his leaving. They would attack the accusers for being unjust. That indicates support.

What's going on now is a salvage operation to make Mozilla appear to be fair and the good guy and this even applies to the individual reputations of the board members.
 
Come on, be the sophisticated thinker you claim to be. These are post-hoc rationalizations/statements and this is standard for every organization. It usually involves the departing executive choosing to spend more time with his family. You know that to be true.

If the board was standing with Eich then we would have seen all of the board members making statements of support while the crisis was brewing. They would not tolerate his leaving. They would attack the accusers for being unjust. That indicates support.

What's going on now is a salvage operation to make Mozilla appear to be fair and the good guy and this even applies to the individual reputations of the board members.

Did you read the NYT story I linked to earlier? Or is that all just damage control in your cynical eyes?
 
Back
Top Bottom