Mozilla CEO resigns over anti-gay marriage controversy

[Derangel]

I never said he should have resigned.

 

But I wonder why he held those opinions in the first place?

 

That is probably how he was raised or perhaps it's part of his religious beliefs. It's impossible to know without actually talking to him. Everyone has their reasons for believing what they do.

[StingBull]

The fact of the matter is there are people that care about what opinions others have.

 

I support free speech absolutely, I think this man shouldn't have gotten fired but it goes to show that people are held accountable for their actions.

 

cae has already expressed what I was going to say. Here's the problem with your approach. Saying people who have "wrong" beliefs should be held accountable for it is just... wrong. The massive slippery slope here is that "wrong belief" can be anything. Oh you believe in Judaism WONG, oh you are a democrat WRONG , oh you like wearing short pants WRONG... etc.

 

Also you can't base the measure of what is right with popular opinion. Popular opinion is just popular it's fallacious to assume it's right or wrong. Going by you example you say majority of the US supports gay marriage, but they didn't 50 years ago. So were they right back then or are they right now?

 

I'm not being hypocritical because it's true. You can't deny the fact in America. 59% of Americans support same sex marriage as of March 2014

 

Umm... What? What does this has to do with what I said?

 

[mr moose]

It makes me wonder why the 34% believe what they do.

I would be wary of newspolls, especially from newspapers.

[qwertywarrior]

it was a bit over kill

why the hell would you care what a CEO did out side his job description

why would we put certain people's  popular or unpopular opinion so high is beyond me when he she isnt an elected official etc just a normal person that doesnt effect the out come of what he is doing at his job

OMG look what he said lets talk about it more and fight him with words yes that will work

[Murdoch]

Really, I can't believe people don't get why this happened, It has nothing to do with his right to freedom of speech,  It is because his personal opinions are turning away customers and hurting the brand name, no CEO can remain the ceo when their personal life ethos is at odds with their job. 

 

Of course he has to step down, regardless of whether it's forced or voluntary,  It is the right thing to do for any business who's CEO says and does things that hurt the bottom line.

 

I'd rather they focused on fixing the bloody issues with flash. I'm seriously thinking about dropping Firefox again, seems like they don't know their ass from their elbow at the moment.

[Derangel]

I'd rather they focused on fixing the bloody issues with flash. I'm seriously thinking about dropping Firefox again, seems like they don't know their ass from their elbow at the moment.

 

No kidding. Flash is a bloody mess on Firefox. Though is the issue Firefox or is it Adobe and the general shittyness of Flash?

[Murdoch]

No kidding. Flash is a bloody mess on Firefox. Though is the issue Firefox or is it Adobe and the general shittyness of Flash?

 

Well it breaks almost every time they update Firefox. So I'm gonna put that on Mozilla. Chrome never has a problem with flash.

[beebskadoo]

cae has already expressed what I was going to say. Here's the problem with your approach. Saying people who have "wrong" beliefs should be held accountable for it is just... wrong. The massive slippery slope here is that "wrong belief" can be anything. Oh you believe in Judaism WONG, oh you are a democrat WRONG , oh you like wearing short pants WRONG... etc.

Also you can't base the measure of what is right with popular opinion. Popular opinion is just popular it's fallacious to assume it's right or wrong. Going by you example you say majority of the US supports gay marriage, but they didn't 50 years ago. So were they right back then or are they right now?

Umm... What? What does this has to do with what I said?

What I am specifically getting at is evidence and fact

opinions are cool and all but I care about why people have them and why they go against factual information. That's why I care, because once you throw logic out the window it's fair game for anyone.

opinions are naturally more dishonest than fact based evidence. that is what I care about.

I'd rather they focused on fixing the bloody issues with flash. I'm seriously thinking about dropping Firefox again, seems like they don't know their ass from their elbow at the moment.

I agree.

[cae]

What evidence and facts are you speaking of?

[beebskadoo]

What evidence and facts are you speaking of?

In general or on the issue of marriage equality?

[ajoy39]

Holy shit this thread is full of stupid.

 

The right to free speech protects you from criminal prosecution for expressing your views, it does not mean that if you are giving a company a bad image with what you believe they can't force you out. Your job is not protected by your opinions,

 

Also to those of you saying people who disagree with his views are close minded, as a person who supports equal rights I have no obligation to condone the beliefs of those who try to keep others from enjoying the same rights they do. Equality does not mean tolerance of intolerance, it never has and it never will. 

[mr moose]

cae has already expressed what I was going to say. Here's the problem with your approach. Saying people who have "wrong" beliefs should be held accountable for it is just... wrong. The massive slippery slope here is that "wrong belief" can be anything. Oh you believe in Judaism WONG, oh you are a democrat WRONG , oh you like wearing short pants WRONG... etc.

 

Also you can't base the measure of what is right with popular opinion. Popular opinion is just popular it's fallacious to assume it's right or wrong. Going by you example you say majority of the US supports gay marriage, but they didn't 50 years ago. So were they right back then or are they right now?

 

 

Umm... What? What does this has to do with what I said?

 

Whilst popular opinion cannot define an actual degree of correctness  It does define a communal notion where a social construct is considered as either acceptable or not by the people.   In the business world popular opinion dictates sales potential, and if your business practice or business activities are at odds with popular opinion (unacceptable by majority opinion)then the business will lose sales potential.  Any company who wants to remain viable will insist a ceo that supports unpopular social structures step down.  

 

I think the key to this is that communal opinion is not always a fact, the fact is that it is not wrong to be gay but 50 years ago the popular opinion was at odds with this fact.  today the fact is still that it is ok to be gay and popular opinion is starting to reflect that. 

[Common_Courtesy]

I see a lot of people saying that he should not have been forced to leave over his homophobic views, but what if he was anti black or anti Muslim would you still be saying the same? What if it was the minority you belong to that he had supported a campaign against, would you still support him? Most likely not. Stuff like this happens all the time. Someone says something racist and suddenly they are a monster who has no place in society, yet someone says something homophobic and we get reactions like the ones in this thread. Is there really any difference between the two though? After all they both come down to belittling a group because of something they have no control over. Either way at the day we are all equal and in my opinion the people who try to say otherwise are the ones who should be forced to step down from their positions and be forced to reconsider their viewpoint. I'm glad that this has happened, it shows that progress is being made.   

[mr moose]

it was a bit over kill

why the hell would you care what a CEO did out side his job description

why would we put certain people's  popular or unpopular opinion so high is beyond me when he she isnt an elected official etc just a normal person that doesnt effect the out come of what he is doing at his job

OMG look what he said lets talk about it more and fight him with words yes that will work

 

A CEO's public actions are never outside their job description, people boycott all sorts of companies because their CEO's donate or voice opinions about certain political parties, charities, religious organizations or whatever. 

[beebskadoo]

I see a lot of people saying that he should not have been forced to leave over his homophobic views, but what if he was anti black or anti Muslim would you still be saying the same? What if it was the minority you belong to that he had supported a campaign against, would you still support him? Most likely not. Stuff like this happens all the time. Someone says something racist and suddenly they are a monster who has no place in society, yet someone says something homophobic and we get reactions like the ones in this thread. Is there really any difference between the two though? After all they both come down to belittling a group because of something they have no control over. Either way at the day we are all equal and in my opinion the people who try to say otherwise are the ones who should be forced to step down from their positions and be forced to reconsider their viewpoint. I'm glad that this has happened, it shows that progress is being made.   

I am gay...very openly so

 

 

I am a bit torn on the subject.

Yes I think he a is dumbfuck for believing this, I don't support his actions or his views but I do support the fact that the company decided it was in their better interest that he should resign.

[cae]

Also to those of you saying people who disagree with his views are close minded, as a person who supports equal rights I have no obligation to condone the beliefs of those who try to keep others from enjoying the same rights they do. Equality does not mean tolerance of intolerance, it never has and it never will. 

 

Marriage is not a right. That's the entire rub. There's a right to practice religion. Some religions hold certain views that do not allow the same privileges to everyone. But it is their right to do so.

[beebskadoo]

Marriage is not a right. That's the entire rub. There's a right to practice religion. Some religions hold certain views that do not allow the same privileges to everyone. But it is their right to do so.

no incorrect

 

Marriage is both a religious and non religious concept.

 

Slippery slope detected.

[solosdk]

It makes me wonder why the 34% believe what they do.

Because in my religion, God made Man for Woman, and Woman for Man. Also one of the main factors for marriage (for us) is to procreate, and you can't do that if you're a homosexual.

[cae]

no incorrect

 

Marriage is both a religious and non religious concept.

 

Slippery slope detected.

 

And neither of those concepts are rights.

[beebskadoo]

Because in my religion, God made Man for Woman, and Woman for Man. Also one of the main factors for marriage (for us) is to procreate, and you can't do that if you're a homosexual.

Warning: Religious debate incoming

 

Hurt feelings approaching.

 

I am really trying not to have another one of these 'discussions'

[mr moose]

I'd rather they focused on fixing the bloody issues with flash. I'm seriously thinking about dropping Firefox again, seems like they don't know their ass from their elbow at the moment.

 

TBH I haven't had an issue with flash on FF yet.  I must be lucky.

 

 

Marriage is not a right. That's the entire rub. There's a right to practice religion. Some religions hold certain views that do not allow the same privileges to everyone. But it is their right to do so.

 

Um, that is so wrong on so many levels,  it is not any specific religions right to prevent someone who does not practice it to get married, Marriage is not a right afforded only to people of a certain religious background and there are religions out their that believe gay marriage is just as legitimate as heterosexual.

[beebskadoo]

And neither of those concepts are rights.

In the US, people have a right to get married for financial purposes.

TBH I haven't had an issue with flash on FF yet. I must be lucky.

Um, that is so wrong on so many levels, it is not any specific religions right to prevent someone who does not practice it to get married, Marriage is not a right afforded only to people of a certain religious background and there are religions out their that believe gay marriage is just as legitimate as heterosexual.

Marriage isn't strictly a religious concept. It is found in most religions meaning that it isn't a christian one either.

[mr moose]

And neither of those concepts are rights.

Everyone has the right to get married if they want, who are you to say they don't?

Marriage isn't strictly a religious concept. It is found in most religions meaning that it isn't a christian one either.

didn't I just say that? :unsure:

EDIT:

Marriage is not a right afforded only to people of a certain religious background

[beebskadoo]

didn't I just say that? :unsure:

I was agreeing with you silly

[Murdoch]

Everyone has the right to get married if they want, who are you to say they don't?

 

I've always thought how hilarious it'd be if all the churches were forced by law to accommodate gay marriage. The potential for trolling would be fantastic!