As many on this blog know, I have long been a supporter of same-sex marriage and gay rights. However, I have qualms about a story this morning that Mozilla Chief Executive Brendan Eich has been forced to step down after a campaign by an online dating service. The campaign revealed that Eich had made a donated $1,000 in 2008 in support of California’s Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in the state before it was struck down in the federal courts. The controversy raises again the tension between free speech and corporate identity.
On Monday, OkCupid sent a message to visitors suggesting that they use browsers such as Microsoft Corp’s Internet Explorer or Google Inc’s Chrome: “Mozilla’s new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay couples. We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to access OkCupid.”
Eich, who invented JavaScript, apologized for causing “pain” and promised to promote equality for gay and lesbian individuals at Mozilla. However, the campaign continued to call for his ouster.
We previously discussed this issue in relation to the Chick-Fil-A controversy. In this case, Eich was targeted for a small donation to the campaign in 2008. Many people oppose same-sex marriage out of deeply held religious or political views. I do not agree with them but this remains a deep divide in our country.
Eich was exercising his free speech rights in a matter of great public debate. I happen to view many current laws as discriminatory. However, the Supreme Court has yet to rule that states cannot prohibit same-sex marriage and there is no indication that Eich would refuse to comply with such a ruling if it were handed down. Indeed, there is no allegation that Eich has been in any way discriminatory toward employees or associates based on sexual orientation.
However, Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker indicated that, if anything, it took too long to can Eich: “We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry.”
That is what concerns me. Should companies now move quickly to can officials for religious or controversial personal views? There was a time when people would be fired for supporting gay rights. What about giving money to presidential candidates like Rick Santorum who oppose gay rights generally? Notably, President Obama’s Administration spent the first few years in office defending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in court. Obama himself refused to endorse same-sex marriage for years in office 00 during the year period of this donation. To this day, the Obama Administration refuses to treat discrimination against homosexuals as the same a race for the purposes of constitutional interpretation. So why is Eich not allowed to hold such personal views in making donations?
I do not question the right of all citizens to launch such a boycott and to use their market power to influence corporate policy. Clearly, many people stopped going to Chick-Fil-A in such a protest. However, I have concerns over the basis for such a campaign when there is no evidence of political or personal views having any connection to the company. Indeed, the company appears a leader in non-discriminatory practices. Where do we draw the line in such cases? What about corporate executives below the CEO or contributions to political parties or candidates viewed initial to same-sex marriage?
Source: Yahoo
Nick,
You’re a creationist?
See, we gays believe people can ‘change’… er, evolve.
Didn’t you notice Obama’s celebration laps when he finally ‘evolved’ on the issue? Ah, the warmth and acceptance he received for having turned that corner.
So, why do you suppose Mr. Eich didn’t do a similar campaign to celebrate his new position of a company that embraces diversity?
It really is a simple question and resorting to calling names of P.C. police is just being intellectually lazy. I like you better when you aren’t perched upon that high horse.
Max-1 – I take it from your comments that you are gay, but my guess is that you voted for homophobe Obama coming from his anti-gay church background with Rev. Wright. Obama may have changed (although any change that Obama made is purely political and has nothing to do with his real feelings). This is a man who threw his grandmother and minister under the bus to get elected. Would you really believe him when he said he ‘evolved’? I don’t.
James Knauer @6:36
Randyjey already reamed for calling her America’s first and worst female Speaker of the House. She’s the first female Speaker, yes? She did let the criminals off, NO?
So somehow, calling her the Worst Female Speaker was incorrect…
… Because ther’s been far worse female Speakers, or something.
We elected a black, homophobe President..TWICE! Who knew?
No Gay Marriage = Homophobe? The PC Police take no prisoners!
Paul, the source is Nate Silver
Hotair is propaganda…
How Rare Are Anti-Gay-Marriage Donations in Silicon Valley?
3:32 PM By NATE SILVER
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-rare-are-anti-gay-marriage-donations-in-silicon-valley/
But whatever… facts.
hotair did not say all of silicon valley, just intel. Max-1 you really need to read more carefully.
===================
Tom Blanton – the original purpose of marriage was to legitimize children and property rights. In some cases it legitimized sexual intercourse (when I was growing up it was legally impossible to rape your wife).
It seems there is one thing that both the right and left agree on in America is that government has a role in licensing marriage, providing what is in essence statutory marriage contracts, giving certain benefits to married people that are denied to unmarried people and making it difficult to end marriages. All of this is supposedly done to encourage marriage and support it in society.
This is the root of all problems regarding same-sex marriage and some of these laws were designed originally to prevent inter-racial marriage.
Now, I don’t know of any gay people thrown in prison because they they got married without a state-issued marriage license. So, there can be same-sex marriage without a state-issued marriage license. There just aren’t any of the bells, whistles and benefits provided by the state. Gay people can get married right now, they want the state benefits and rights – even though many of these things can be had with wills, joint ownership with survivorship, living wills, etc.
In addition to the state benefits, I think most gay people want social acceptance. This is something that no legislation can provide them and it is something that will become harder to get the more times people like Brendan Eich are punished.
So maybe the real answer is to separate marriage and the state. Eliminate the perks, the licenses, and everything thing else designed to promote marriage. This would be fair and equitable for everyone – married, single, straight and gay.
But, if my observations of Republicans and Democrats are correct, government will never get out of marriage or any other facet of our lives because these Republicrat hacks live to control others – especially people they don’t like. It also gives the two parties an issue that they disagree on to give the illusion of having an actual democracy instead of a plutocracy (that is primarily concerned with wealth concentration and geopolitical matters instead of social issues).
Hey Rube! Look! There’s a immoral queer getting married over there! Pay no attention to this trillion dollar bailout.
Hey Rube! Look over there! There’s an evil Christian that hates gay people! Pay no attention to the covert ops in 100 different nations.
Paul Schulte,
Yes, one can ‘evolve’ on issues…
… And when Obama did, he celebrated it with a social media campaign.
Mr. Eich, not so much.
Why do you suppose this to be?
Sorry, link to Twitter deletion…
http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=18245&MediaType=1&Category=26
Is there any mention as to why Mr. Eich has deleted his Twitter account?
Breitbart associate, Ben Shapiro…
http://www.truthrevolt.org/firefox
But then again, it’s never a sea of marching angry villagers shaking fists at clouds shouting, “Get off my browser” when it’s a Right Wing Religiously motivated boycott.
Ah, Religious Freedumb!
Paul, excellent comment. May I add:
“Discussing the issue with such frequency, in public and private, as far back as 2003 or 2004, I’ve had many occasions to observe that an individual’s position on the policy question turns out to be a flawed proxy for his or her attitude toward gays and lesbians.” — CONOR FRIEDERSDORF
http://m.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/mozillas-gay-marriage-litmus-test-violates-liberal-values/360156/
Of course, this guilt-by-disassociation crosses all topics.
I’m not the only one believing in a conspiracy theory:
“Yes, it was broader than that. It was a coalition of those, gay and straight, who do not believe that people with different views than theirs’ should be tolerated in a leadership position. It’s a reminder of just how closed-minded and vicious so much of the identity-politics left can be.” –Andrew Sullivan
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/04/04/dissents-of-the-day-63/
I agree with the very first comment by Justice Holmes.
I am against same sex dressing rooms and toilet rooms. I would hate to get fired though for refusing to go into one.
http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/04/uh-oh-60-of-intel-employees-who-donated-in-prop-8-debate-supported-banning-gay-marriage/
Basically, I agree with Justice Holmes in the first comment. IF it doesn’t affect his job performance. Homophobia, like any bigotry, has subtle (if not overt) effects how people interact. It plays a role in who gets hired, what kinds of assignments they get, what they are paid, how much their work is recognized, who gets promoted, etc. Another point, a $1000 contribution isn’t small for most people.
bettykath – one can be against same sex marriages and not be a homophobe. Just ask President Obama.
Paul, “President Biden.” Now, there’s a horror movie to end all horror movies.
Paul Schulte, California is an at-will employment state so an employer does not have to have cause to fire an employee unless a contract imposes that obligation.
I would think the CEO would have a contract. Just thinking out loud here. 🙂
Green Mountain Boy, One of the dirty little secrets is many black people hate gays, Mexicans, Hispanics and whites. They are actually a lot like Archie Bunker if you subtract “whites.” This is a generality, but the lower on the economic scale, the higher the intolerance. Well ALL have dark sides, that’s how I made my living.
Max-1, Rep Pelosi did precisely what she was told to do by the President. The only possible excuse the President has, now five years into his aiding and abetting, is that he and his family were threatened in no uncertain terms otherwise.
Because it remains inconceivable that even the janitor who cleans the classrooms in which Constitutional law is taught would be blind to the clear war crimes committed.
The much more likely explanation is the country elected a politician, a human male of a certain vintage where compartmentalization occurs as a matter of belief. He lies. He was, of course, the first politician to ever do that. Even St. Ronnie Upon Reagan advised, trust, and verify. The “and” part was one of his few policies with which I agreed.
Should any U.S. attorneys be having a beer this Friday afternoon reading this blog, it’s up to you to find the courage to seat grand juries. One pull at this wretched tapestry and it’s all coming down.
America literally cannot move on until then, IMHO.
Meanwhile, Congress granted these awful powers that doom every President to come after, and only Congress can yank them back. Thorny problem, and some of the principles likely have to expire first. But utterly, necessarily soluble.
My apologies for straying so far afield of the posted topic.
James Knauer,
Doesn’t Mr. Orange Boehner need to put impeachment back onto the table Ms. Pelosi unset?
Max-1 – think the one thing that will save Obama from impeachment is the replacement, Joe Biden. It is probably why no effort has been made to this point. 🙂
Alt. solution…
There was a perfect PR campaign opportunity flushed down the toilet.
Mr. Eich could have joined forces with Mozilla to produce social media ads explaining why he was wrong to support prop8 and how he has PRIDE standing with his LGBT brothers and sisters and is happy to be part of Mozilla’s team.
… But alas.