• 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]

RiverDad said:
It's now time to remove these protections. It's obscene that people can be fired for supporting marriage and not for the above. Let's have a free-fire zone - everyone can be fired for any damn reason.
Click to expand...

Nope, never going to happen. Though I'm sure you dream of a utopia where you can fire the gays, the blacks, the women, and anyone else who was born into a body you don't agree with.
 
RiverDad said:
1.)It's now time to remove these protections.
2.) It's obscene that people can be fired for supporting marriage and not for the above.
3.) Let's have a free-fire zone - everyone can be fired for any damn reason.
Click to expand...

1.) you just cant remove rights so no
2.) if it violate rights they cant be, if its illegal discrimination they cant be
3.) again no thanks i like our rights protected
 
AGENT J said:
even all those arent protected if theres a contract. FOr example religion. There have been cases of teachers or admin losing thier jobs at religious schools because they participated in a marriage that was fine with thier person religion but not the schools conduct clause.

But again a person knows this going in, its not a surprise and this is only for contracts.
Click to expand...

Well, there is the concept of BFOQ Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications, if there was a casting for a movie about JFK and Samuel L Jackson got turned down for the part, (unless it was one really experimental film), he would not be able to say he was discriminated against. Most religious schools and such are not publicly traded companies, nor are they under the mandates of EO 11246.

But, when I train managers...I explain the law and why doing the right thing IS the right thing, regardless of federal and state laws.
 
Zinthaniel said:
Nope, never going to happen. Though I'm sure you dream of a utopia where you can fire the gays, the blacks, the women, and anyone else who was born into a body you don't agree with.
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised at how quickly opinions can turn. Homosexuals are way overplaying their hand here. I get that being on a power trip is enervating, especially when mixed in a cocktail of moral righteousness. All employers need to fire is plausible deniability, they fire for one cause which can be documented but the reality is that the person was fired for voting in favor of homosexual "marriage."
 
RiverDad said:
You'd be surprised at how quickly opinions can turn. Homosexuals are way overplaying their hand here. I get that being on a power trip is enervating, especially when mixed in a cocktail of moral righteousness. All employers need to fire is plausible deniability, they fire for one cause which can be documented but the reality is that the person was fired for voting in favor of homosexual "marriage."
Click to expand...

No one is on a "Power Trip". More and more companies are diligently aligning themselves with pro equality views and are not go to tolerate an image that contradicts that.
 
beefheart said:
Well, there is the concept of BFOQ Bona Fide Occupational Qualifications, if there was a casting for a movie about JFK and Samuel L Jackson got turned down for the part, (unless it was one really experimental film), he would not be able to say he was discriminated against. Most religious schools and such are not publicly traded companies, nor are they under the mandates of EO 11246.

But, when I train managers...I explain the law and why doing the right thing IS the right thing, regardless of federal and state laws.
Click to expand...

thats what my manager training was also and i think people not knowing that is where the issues start
 
RiverDad said:
You'd be surprised at how quickly opinions can turn. Homosexuals are way overplaying their hand here. I get that being on a power trip is enervating, especially when mixed in a cocktail of moral righteousness. All employers need to fire is plausible deniability, they fire for one cause which can be documented but the reality is that the person was fired for voting in favor of homosexual "marriage."
Click to expand...

Oh man, the train passed you by hours ago, and you are angry and alone in a field thinking it is going to come back, just for you.

Time for you to go yell at kids to get off your lawn.

World changed for the better, you didn't.
 
AGENT J said:
thats what my manager training was also and i think people not knowing that is where the issues start
Click to expand...


Well, I don't do the fuzzy diversity stuff, I do the legal side and the laws and the compliance issues and such.

But, if a company doesn't train, or make good faith efforts to outreach to all qualified applicants, then they are hurting themselves legally and financially.

I am so thankful to work for an enormous company that does the right thing, and when we are audited by the feds, we pass with flying colors.
 
RiverDad said:
It's now time to remove these protections. It's obscene that people can be fired for supporting marriage and not for the above. Let's have a free-fire zone - everyone can be fired for any damn reason.
Click to expand...

That company would tank so fast.
 
Kobie said:
If the government threw him in jail, that would be violating freedom of speech. He exercised his first amendment right to freedom of speech; Mozilla exercised theirs to freedom of association.
Click to expand...

No, Mozilla did not. Mozilla is in gross violation of laws of employment (might want to read up on them). His religious views (and he can claim this) were expressed and thus asking him to resign or threatening that he would be fired would be cause of a law suit and Mozilla ponying up some money.
 
Zinthaniel said:
No one is on a "Power Trip". More and more companies are diligently aligning themselves with pro equality views and are not go to tolerate an image that contradicts that.
Click to expand...


The last dregs of the workforce that thinks like he does have naturally left through attrition, another generation moves in. It is always that way, standing around and being an angry old throwback does nothing (except make that person look like an angry old crank)
 
beefheart said:
Well, I don't do the fuzzy diversity stuff, I do the legal side and the laws and the compliance issues and such.

But, if a company doesn't train, or make good faith efforts to outreach to all qualified applicants, then they are hurting themselves legally and financially.

I am so thankful to work for an enormous company that does the right thing, and when we are audited by the feds, we pass with flying colors.
Click to expand...

thats the way it should be every company ive worked for has been like that. ALl companies have to do is obey the law :shrug:
 
austrianecon said:
No, Mozilla did not. Mozilla is in gross violation of laws of employment (might want to read up on them). His religious views (and he can claim this) were expressed and thus asking him to resign or threatening that he would be fired would be cause of a law suit and Mozilla ponying up some money.
Click to expand...

Unless he was recompensated in a way he deemed satisfactory.
 
Zinthaniel said:
Freedom of speech protects you from imprisonment not societal backlash.
Click to expand...

Societal backlash? You mean bloggers who eat cheetos in their parent's basement. Wonder if the societal backlash is gonna go as far as uninstalling Java Script cause that's what he developed and coded for Netscape, then help found Mozilla foundation and the chief architect of Mozilla... oh that's right.. they just didn't want him as CEO but they have no problem using Java or Mozilla.
 
Cardinal said:
Unless he was recompensated in a way he deemed satisfactory.
Click to expand...

And that might be the case.. but this claim a company can fire you willy nilly for your political or religious beliefs is hog wash as claimed by many so far.
 
austrianecon said:
Societal backlash? You mean bloggers who eat cheetos in their parent's basement. Wonder if the societal backlash is gonna go as far as uninstalling Java Script cause that's what he developed and coded for Netscape, then help found Mozilla foundation and the chief architect of Mozilla... oh that's right.. they just didn't want him as CEO but they have no problem using Java or Mozilla.
Click to expand...

Oh, wow, Netscape. Man, that takes me back.
 
austrianecon said:
And that might be the case.. but this claim a company can fire you willy nilly for your political or religious beliefs is hog wash as claimed by many so far.
Click to expand...


But I agree with you. I do, however, think that the means of moving people along can vary. Not that that should in any way be interpreted as sympathy for Eich.
 
Redress said:
Without action, no one knows your beliefs.
Click to expand...

So just to understand your stance

Donating to a political campaign, organization, or entity is reasonable grounds for firing to you?

On a legal level, or on a personal "right and wrong" level?

I will say, I don't see a large issue legally here.

I do think this is a symptom of our continually crumbling society that's spiraling into a political black hole, where politics and causes infiltrate everything and becomes a pseudo war between each side with an "any means necessary attitude".

Be it chick-fil-a firing an employee because they volunteer for a pro-choice group or Starbucks firing someone for being an NRA member, it just sits somewhat off for me for companies to devolve to the point of utilizing people's livelihoods as a weapon in a political battle. This one is a bit more complicated due to the person being a CEO, but it still sits off with me as a concept.

At least Fiddy is forthright in his intent and description of what he wants to see happen.

For years I've described "hyperpartisan" as someone who contorts every situation into one that is a political "us good vs them bad" situation. Well, taking a political donation to a relatively mainstream cause (like it or not, opposing gay marriage is hardly tantamount to something like deporting all Muslims or some other extreme notion) of an individual and using it as a means of boycotting a company (potentially damaging a fair number of innocents) in order to cause someone to lose their job screams of a society that is bordering on becoming rather hyperpartisan
 
austrianecon said:
And that might be the case.. but this claim a company can fire you willy nilly for your political or religious beliefs is hog wash as claimed by many so far.
Click to expand...

no its not, many companies have conduct, exposure, publicity clause/contracts etc. Especial for high profile employees. SO its VERY possible to get fired for those things if the requirements are met.

Currently there is ZERO evidence that Mozilla did anything illegal. ZERO.
 
beefheart said:
The last dregs of the workforce that thinks like he does have naturally left through attrition, another generation moves in. It is always that way, standing around and being an angry old throwback does nothing (except make that person look like an angry old crank)
Click to expand...

Really? You clearly misunderstand the workforce. California supported the law he donated in support of. Largely lifted by African-American and Hispanic vote. Guess what.. Hispanic population is the largest growing population so no.. the work force is rid of the "dregs".

For myself, I am in my mid 30s and I don't believe in gay marriage. But that doesn't mean I don't believe in civil unions or rights for same-sex couples. I think marriage is a religious invention and thus should be left to the religion to decide. Now what's wrong with that view? Absolutely nothing legally speaking because marriage is a church related event but according to the law marriage and civil union are the same things.
 
austrianecon said:
Societal backlash? You mean bloggers who eat cheetos in their parent's basement. Wonder if the societal backlash is gonna go as far as uninstalling Java Script cause that's what he developed and coded for Netscape, then help found Mozilla foundation and the chief architect of Mozilla... oh that's right.. they just didn't want him as CEO but they have no problem using Java or Mozilla.
Click to expand...

Mhmm... Right and Alan Turning, a gay man, invented the modern computer without which the homophobic ex-ceo would not have been able to develop his script. So I guess we are all using each other and hating each other at the same time.
 
Zyphlin said:
So just to understand your stance

Donating to a political campaign, organization, or entity is reasonable grounds for firing to you?

On a legal level, or on a personal "right and wrong" level?

I will say, I don't see a large issue legally here.

I do think this is a symptom of our continually crumbling society that's spiraling into a political black hole, where politics and causes infiltrate everything and becomes a pseudo war between each side with an "any means necessary attitude".

Be it chick-fil-a firing an employee because they volunteer for a pro-choice group or Starbucks firing someone for being an NRA member, it just sits somewhat off for me for companies to devolve to the point of utilizing people's livelihoods as a weapon in a political battle. This one is a bit more complicated due to the person being a CEO, but it still sits off with me as a concept.

At least Fiddy is forthright in his intent and description of what he wants to see happen.

For years I've described "hyperpartisan" as someone who contorts every situation into one that is a political "us good vs them bad" situation. Well, taking a political donation to a relatively mainstream cause (like it or not, opposing gay marriage is hardly tantamount to something like deporting all Muslims or some other extreme notion) of an individual and using it as a means of boycotting a company (potentially damaging a fair number of innocents) in order to cause someone to lose their job screams of a society that is bordering on becoming rather hyperpartisan
Click to expand...

I will try and remember to get back to you when I get home tomorrow and am at a keyboard and not typing on a tablet. Short answer till then...it depends on circumstances. A CEO is a direct, top representative of a company. They are held to different standards. Some causes are more controversial than others. Some causes effect those who use a companies products. And so on. In this case, you had a confluence of such factors.

And personally, I had no problem with him as CEO, and would have continued to use their flagship product, which I love. Ask me about my new Firefox add on I got that helps me translate Japanese.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom