- Joined
- Sep 17, 2013
- Messages
- 48,281
- Reaction score
- 25,273
- Location
- Western NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
And if conservatives are going to boycott Mozilla, as Charles Krauthammer called for, then LET THE BROWSER WARS BEGIN.
Everything is controversial. Well, nearly everything.
I would suggest that political views are not a valid reason to either hire or fire a person. On the other hand, arguments could be made for firing a person if their presence is disruptive enough.
Did you read the NYT story I linked to earlier? Or is that all just damage control in your cynical eyes?
I believe you're right. Getting to the top of a multi billion dollar corporation like that suggests he is no fool. Mozilla will lose all the way around.
His successor better be sure that any past donations somehow remain hidden from Leftists. Most other people wouldn't care where any donations may have gone..
Post-hoc rationalizations are efforts to write history a particular way. If there really was an "all hands on deck" effort to keep Eich in the job, then that would have been evident DURING the battle. Doesn't that make sense to you?
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.
Was this multi-year-ago donation the cause of said forcing (if indeed such occurred) or simply the finial straw? Or was it even a factor at all?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.
But how do you know that things happened in that way?Well, if you are at will, and you are a detractor to the business, then I understand. In this case, it was the left, the oh so tolerant left, being completely intolerant bigots and going out of their way, demanding a person be let go because of their perfectly legitimate beliefs. Mozilla made a knee jerk reaction, instead of doing the right thing. Hopefully, they will see a worse backlash for being cowards.
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.
Using your analogy:
If I tell you your mother is a ********ing whore, that's free speech.
If I pay a band to compose a song about your mother being a ********ing whore, that's ridiculous overkill but also free speech (I think?). And I didn't actually say anything to you personally.
That's why I'm not seeing the disconnect between a political donation to promote a cause vs saying something to promote a cause.
Different forms, same intent.
Good luck in all your future endeavors.eace
I did not make that analogy.no the INTENT is clearly different
just feeling marriage is man/woman has ZERO intent
donating money to try and stop others from having that right has an intent of denying others rights
you just answered your own question
i accept your concession
Tyranny? You people are insane.
Civil rights should not be left to the will of the masses.
no
think
feeling
saying
teaching your own
preaching
that gay marriage is wrong or being gay is wrong is not bigotry
trying to deni them rights or treating them as leasers is bigotry
theres a HUGE difference.
there are lots of people that feel marriage is a man woman thing personally but they fully support equal rights because they respect peoples rights
1.)OK, I got ya, I think....So, people that disagree with the LGBT agenda are free to have those beliefs, as long as they don't speak them publicly, or donate anything to opposition of them, or else they open themselves to harassment, and attack to the point where they are forced to resign from their job...And this isn't fascism? I mean I get that people are passionate about this issue, but how is it that any squelching of LGBT voicing their agenda in the public square, ie protest, or donation, or what ever would be seen by advocates as a stomping on the free speech rights of the LGBT community, and would be met with ramped up vitriol, and cries of fascistic suppression. However, because it is aimed not AT the LGBT community, but rather at an individual that did little more than donate years ago to a cause on a ballot up for referendum by the people, and chose what is perceived by the passionate as "the wrong side", well, then he must be 'isolated, destroyed, and marginalized' in the purest form of Alinski style debasement.
2.)How is it that the supporters of these memes cant see how it is that they are carrying out what they claim to be attacking? I just don't get it I suppose.
None was offered. Is your self-esteem really so tied up in this forum?eace
I did not make that analogy.
yep
SOME people simply dont care about rights and freedoms that exist in this country. They dont care about their fellow americans one bit. Its pure hypocrisy as an american.
SOME people want less government and talk about rights and constitution BUT that stuff only matters for what THEY want lol. Its only matters for THEIR rights, in their views the hell with everyone else.
But luckily equality is winning and bigotry and discrimination is losing and its awesome. Its hilarious to see the fear and angry equal rights inspires in some and how many lies they will try to sell to. Nobody honest, educated and objective buys their false claims.
its always funny to see somebody claim they are being forced when equal rights forces nothing on them it just allows others to have the same rights they do and their way would be to DENY others rights.
Well they dont have long to try these desperate, hateful, last minute, hell marys because its the 4th water and gay rights will be national soon
but until then the hyperbolic, mentally inane, BS crying about rouge judges, force, tradition, sanctity, morals, bestiality, pedophilia, saying its just the left/liberals that support equal rights, history of marriage, dangers of the icky gays etc etc and all the other failed and proven wrong fallacies will continue to entertain educated and honest righties, lefties and independents alike Its comic gold!
id like to add the failed fallacy of "double standards" to the list.
still cant defend your failed argument of "decent" huh? lol let me know when you can
correct because it completely failed and there is none for itIt needs no defense.eace
Do you feel the same way about the genuine right to keep and bear arms, as explicitly affirmed in the Constutution; as you do about the inaginary “right” to radically redefine the concept of marriage into something that is only a sick mockery of what marriage has always been held to be?
Do you feel the same way about the genuine right to keep and bear arms, as explicitly affirmed in the Constutution; as you do about the inaginary “right” to radically redefine the concept of marriage into something that is only a sick mockery of what marriage has always been held to be?
Frankly, I don't care one way or the other about his opinion on gay marriage.
However, I am VERY alarmed that this type of coercion and censorship would be allowed in our country.
Accordingly, I have removed Firefox (I've used it for 5 years) from my machine, and will go to another browser.