New Mozilla (Firefox) CEO Brendan Eich Donated To Anti-Gay Charity - Boycott Started!
- Thread starter Jasper
- Start date
- Status
That's a very easy position to hold when nobody is trying to take your rights away because of things you have no control over.
I'm guessing you don't "see" race or sexuality because you're in a privileged position where those things really don't adversely affect you.
Great! Too bad you just made the argument that labels SHOULD be allowed to decide if a marriage should take place. You make no sense.
Mammoth Jones
Member
This sums up my feelings exactly. He donated 1k 6 years ago. Unless the corporate culture @ Mozilla changes because of this I don't see a big problem.
manueldelalas
Time Traveler
Oh, but some people want to take rights away from the Mozilla CEO (forcing the corporation to fire or demote him, not considering his qualifications) because of his personal beliefs.
This is what I've seen:
The most conservative senator of my country (the one that is anti-divorce) hired a person to clean his house; 5 months later he discovered she was a transexual, he didn't care; why? because he is not intolerant, even if he is against gay marriage, and he didn't feel the need to ask.
One of the most conservative enterprises of my country, one that says in the ads that is "inspired in God and the Virgin", has a CEO (the equivalent) that is an atheist. Why? because that CEO is very good and the enterprise has had success. And that enterprise donates to politicians against gay marriage.
Personally, I've never asked one of my workers if he is gay or not, or what he thinks about a particular law, because frankly, I don't care, I want people that do the job right, I'm tolerant, see? That doesn't mean that I can't have my own personal belief, or defend the kind of society I want for my country.
This isn't a human rights issue. People disagree with his political doings, so they would rather use social pressure to oust him rather than indirectly support him by continuing development without objection.
And to the previous poster, I was not defending the new CEO; I was defending the people who object to him.
And to the previous poster, I was not defending the new CEO; I was defending the people who object to him.
Random Painted HIghway
Member
a 1k donation 6 years ago on a position that while may be repulsive to many cannot be considered extremist considering the % of the population holding said belief in 2008 (even many liberal luminaries) and even today seems to me to be quite an absurd reason to boycott a product, particularly a webbrowser/software. To me this appears to be a witchhunt that is made all too easy in this day and age of internet searches and certainly creates a chilling effect on adult political discourse in this country. Particularly when this appears to be a financial donation and not using his then position to influence or even be outspoken via blogs or whatnot.
For perspective on the donation, according to, ahem, wikipedia: The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 respectively raised $39.0 million and $44.1 million.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)
I think its a shame when people go on a rampage about something like this or the Dixie Chicks, or any other similar instances, certainly not limited to one political party or end of the spectrum and and threaten someone's livelihood. Attempting to sabotage someone's current life for such a minor donation 6 years ago seems counter productive to productive political discourse and is very immature. Persons holding different opinions on than ourselves on contentious political issues exist, particularly when a large minority of the population hold similar opinions. If those political issues have not been made a part of the person's job resume or an off-the-job blog focus, then it is in the economy's best interest to have those folks be utilized to their fullest and not be artificially restrained due holding a position that a large minority (and at the time majority) holds. you hear all the time how the crazy background delving the media engages in for political candidates causes has caused more than one person who otherwise would run to not run in order to "not drag their families through that". Is this boycott the logical extension to the private sector made much easier due to the internet?
Has Eich commented on this blow up yet? He might have just changed his perspective since 2008 and 2012.
TLDR: 1k donation 6 years ago by an individual on a pretty evenly split issue leads to a boycott of a software product? WTF.
For perspective on the donation, according to, ahem, wikipedia: The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 respectively raised $39.0 million and $44.1 million.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)
I think its a shame when people go on a rampage about something like this or the Dixie Chicks, or any other similar instances, certainly not limited to one political party or end of the spectrum and and threaten someone's livelihood. Attempting to sabotage someone's current life for such a minor donation 6 years ago seems counter productive to productive political discourse and is very immature. Persons holding different opinions on than ourselves on contentious political issues exist, particularly when a large minority of the population hold similar opinions. If those political issues have not been made a part of the person's job resume or an off-the-job blog focus, then it is in the economy's best interest to have those folks be utilized to their fullest and not be artificially restrained due holding a position that a large minority (and at the time majority) holds. you hear all the time how the crazy background delving the media engages in for political candidates causes has caused more than one person who otherwise would run to not run in order to "not drag their families through that". Is this boycott the logical extension to the private sector made much easier due to the internet?
Has Eich commented on this blow up yet? He might have just changed his perspective since 2008 and 2012.
TLDR: 1k donation 6 years ago by an individual on a pretty evenly split issue leads to a boycott of a software product? WTF.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I don't think this guy's donation is necessarily indicative of significant concerns about Mozilla's ongoing approach (so I didn't really feel the need to weigh in on this thread or discussion until now), but one of the major distinctions here would be that if you asked Hillary about that, she'd note that she favous same-sex marriage now and regrets the hurt her actions at the time caused... whereas I think the point of contention here is more than Eich is unrepentant.
Just because society is split doesn't mean someone can't find the position offensive. It's kind of weird that you think it means people shouldn't have strong feeling about the issue.
I like the latest Firefox more, personally.
Anyways, I feel torn on these sort of things. I'm of the mind that realistically, the majority of products and companies we support, could indirectly tie to some unethical or immoral action that we would object to. So unless we boycott everything, in some form or another we are always supporting something (directly or indirectly).
Is JavaScript easy to boycott too?
JavaScript is an ugly hellspawn of a language and fully deserves to be boycotted
Mercury Fred
Banned
Just uninstalled from my phone and my laptop.
Thanks for the heads up, OP.
Thanks for the heads up, OP.
CornBurrito
Member
Or you can pick and choose like everyone else in the world. People don't need to be perfect.
lol, boycotting over a person who did soemthing on his own personal time and money.
you might as well boycott everything becasue someone, somewhere, everywhere is goin to have an opinion different than yours
Surface of Me
I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
Yeah this was six years ago and before he was even CEO? Unless there was also a more recent donation, this is silly as shit.
So it's better to do nothing
No cultural sanctions to ensure a progressing society
No problems with money flows to and from groups that intend to make life worse for a certain portion of society
Throw out the things you care about, everyone! We can't change everything, so fuck it!
CornBurrito
Member
Imtehman is a fairly religious dude who said he was surprised that atheists respected their parents because they don't "have any reason to if they don't believe in god". Take that into consideration when replying to him.
Chezzymann
Member
The only reason I could see for people protesting this by unistalling firefox was if he was doing it with firefox's money (like with the chick-fil-a thing).
For those of you boycotting Firefox, are you also going to stop using the internet? Because Brandon Eich invented javascript which is implemented in nearly every website and browser.
I'm not sure what boycotting Firefox/Mozilla in this case is going to achieve. Given Eich's technical background and history with Mozilla he is not going anywhere at this point and I have my doubts that any boycott is going to change that. Unless his personal opinions affect the culture at Mozilla, boycotting them at this point is kind of silly.
I'm not sure what boycotting Firefox/Mozilla in this case is going to achieve. Given Eich's technical background and history with Mozilla he is not going anywhere at this point and I have my doubts that any boycott is going to change that. Unless his personal opinions affect the culture at Mozilla, boycotting them at this point is kind of silly.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
Can we get a list of all other prop 8 donators so we can boycott all of them forever too?
I'm uninstalling JavaScript today
I'm uninstalling JavaScript today
dragonelite
Member
Pyramid head
Banned
I love this.
Why does it matter whose money it was? The point is that the guy takes stances that people generally disagree with. You can choose whether or not that gets you riled up, but for some people it's an important enough issue that they don't want to support the entire company because of it.
Chezzymann
Member
Because theres a lot more people than just him working for the company.
OrangeJulius
Member
Are people seriously going to boycott over this? Really? Is he a dumbass? Yes. Is it his own fucking business? Yes.
He spent his own personal money on it, what he does with his own money on his own time is his business. I will continue to use FIrefox because I like it. I wonder how many products people use on a daily basis are headed up by a company with bigots and assholes at the highest corporate positions?
Are all of you going to boycott those companies and products too?
Pick your battles people, this isn't one of them.
If you want to call him a bigoted prick, fine, he is. But to boycott Mozilla or their products over it is asinine. Steve Jobs was by most accounts a wanker. Doesn't stop people from buying iphones by the millions.
He spent his own personal money on it, what he does with his own money on his own time is his business. I will continue to use FIrefox because I like it. I wonder how many products people use on a daily basis are headed up by a company with bigots and assholes at the highest corporate positions?
Are all of you going to boycott those companies and products too?
Pick your battles people, this isn't one of them.
If you want to call him a bigoted prick, fine, he is. But to boycott Mozilla or their products over it is asinine. Steve Jobs was by most accounts a wanker. Doesn't stop people from buying iphones by the millions.
Mercury Fred
Banned
Yes it's "his own business" to spend money to disenfranchise, punish and humiliate gay people. He, like everyone else who donated to Prop 8, should never be forgiven nor ever be able to live it down in any aspect of their lives unless they dedicate their time AND money to pro-gay causes, no exceptions.
Boycotting is silly. This is something he did with his money and time, not company resources. He indicated in a 2012 blog post that this was completely separate from his work beliefs, as is easily demonstrated by Mozilla and their benefits package and employment terms. Call out the guy. Say whatever you want to say about the guy, but boycotting the business? If the company was taking an official stance on the issue, then yes.
At a certain point, we have to assume that professional individuals and their personal ethics and morals are not impacting the job they are doing leading a company. I work in the public sector. If political leanings impacted every job, nothing would get done in government because no one would have a job due to their political affiliation
.
I see this as a non issue and I am one of the strongest defenders that I know of LGBTQ issues, in a fairly progressive city.
At a certain point, we have to assume that professional individuals and their personal ethics and morals are not impacting the job they are doing leading a company. I work in the public sector. If political leanings impacted every job, nothing would get done in government because no one would have a job due to their political affiliation
cue nothing gets done in government now jokes, HURHUR
I see this as a non issue and I am one of the strongest defenders that I know of LGBTQ issues, in a fairly progressive city.
OrangeJulius
Member
What does that have to do with anything I said? As I posted, boycott the man, not the company he works for. Mozilla and more specifically Firefox did not donate the money, HE did.
Uninstalling Firefox over this is asinine and placing blame in the wrong place.
If I kicked your dog would you hate my accountant for it? It makes no sense to place blame on an unrelated party.
Problem is, how many people have supported Prop 8, that are involved in something you give money to? I mean, the question is, do you not support something because indirectly it's tied to someone that supported something you object?
Honestly, had this been Mozilla's own money being used for it, then I could see a point to boycotting. But boycotting over this, seems really impractical and tbh, silly. And as I said, the web is a big one. I'm willing to bet that there are a lot of terrible people that support completely immoral things, that you indirectly fund daily by buying certain products. You might not know about it. But lets say everything was out on the table, and you find out all these people. And lets argue that, the majority of the products you buy on a daily basis has SOMEONE working for this company that indirectly makes money off you buying said product. Are you really going to boycott everything?
Ok so basically what you're saying is he's allowed to have his view but if people have a view of not wanting to support an organization headed by someone with his outlook on a very important issue they're silly because.....reasons? It's the Chick-fil-A argument again. I like it so you're wrong to boycott it.
The funny part is that this guy might be openminded and might change his mind at some point down the road and see how foolish he was. There was not a sea change overnight when SCOTUS ruled on Loving in 1968. A large majority of the country at that point was against interracial marriage.
The change in support of interracial marriage over the last 45 years has been incredible. It has more than completely flipped from 80% against in 1968. Gay marriage will get there as well, but for some people, it takes more than a court case they haven't been following to change their opinion or deeply held moral convictions, regardless of how wrong they are.
The change in support of interracial marriage over the last 45 years has been incredible. It has more than completely flipped from 80% against in 1968. Gay marriage will get there as well, but for some people, it takes more than a court case they haven't been following to change their opinion or deeply held moral convictions, regardless of how wrong they are.
OrangeJulius
Member
Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying. I'm clearly stating that hating an unrelated party for the actions of another is bonkers.
It has nothing to do with chick-fil-a seeing as they had company sponsored bigoted events and donated COMPANY money to bigoted organizations. Wake me up when Mozilla does that.
Everyone has the right to NOT support a company based on any reason. It's your money. However, again, it seems highly impractical to boycott an entire company because it has an employee that supports something you object to. So where are you drawing the line. If Starbucks has someone at the corporate level (not CEO), that supports anti-gay bills, are you going to boycott the entire company then? What about all the other employees they have that you don't know about, and who technically are indirectly funded by you when you buy a product, who also support things you object to?
Or do you only draw the line when it's someone that is the head of a company?
You can do whatever the hell you want. But I personally see this as highly impractical. And I think if you are going to use this line of logic, you better be prepared to boycott a lot of things you buy from any company that has over 1,000 employees.
Random Painted HIghway
Member
No, that's not what I'm saying at all. Presumably, strong feelings on one side led to the donation at issue in the first place, I would not seek to deny someone feelings counter to the initial action, and I am really not sure how you could take previous post as such.
Mercury Fred
Banned
He doesn't just "work for" Mozilla. He's the CEO. Bit of a difference there, wouldn't you say?
OrangeJulius
Member
Precisely.
Like I said, I hope none of you reactionary boy-cotters are using any Apple products, cuz man oh man, that Steve Jobs presided over some anti gay decisions of his own while heading up Apple. I wouldn't want any of you to look like hypocrites.
i sincerely hope people who are boycotting firefox now will boycott google
StopMakingSense
Member
edit: next page cause the person I'm replying to will never see this.
- Status