5 ms·

because respecting someone's beliefs == respecting that person. you can think the the beliefs are stupid, but you can still respect them.

MichaelGG 13y ago
What does it mean to respect a belief, or have it equal to respecting the person? Some people would have others hung for dating outside their race - what does it entail exactly to "respect that person"? Like, admit they are human and should be allowed to hold their own beliefs? Because you can do that while holding someone in complete contempt.
- anaphor 13y ago
  It means that you attack their beliefs, not the person themself. Or you publicize their views and say that you disagree with them. In this case there are some people doing just that, which is fine. However IMO trying to launch a boycott against Firefox is silly and poorly thought out. You are only increasing the chance that people will be harrassed (disrespected) for their browser choice, and pushing people towards non-free software like Chrome and MSIE.
anaphor 13y ago
Finally someone who gets it. Free speech isn't about some abstract right that you can only technically exercise. Everyone also has the right to associate with whoever they chose. But launching public campaigns designed to restrict the speech of someone is not okay in my view, it's like a form of harrassment I think. Launching campaigns to _discredit their ideas_ however, is better I think. Also just launching a campaign to publicize their views is fine, as long as they're backed up with evidence (which they are in this case). I may be on the wrong side of this issue but I refuse to take part in boycotts because I think they're ineffective and just harmful, unless of course the product itself is harming people in some way.
- nollidge 13y ago
  No, neither of you get it. All you have is the right to speech free from governmental impedance; you do not have any sort of right to speech free from civil consequences. Boycotts are a form of free speech too, you know. How come you're not so antsy to defend those rights, I wonder?
  - anaphor 13y ago
    While it may not technically be a violation of laws protecting freedom of speech, consider for example... - Organizing a group of bookstores to stop selling a certain book because you find it offensive for any reason - Using your privileged position at say, a conference, to get other speakers removed because you dislike them - as a web service provider, removing a website about a topic you find offensive None of these have anything to do with the government making a law that infringes on free speech. If they don't violate laws protecting free speech then they certainly piss all over the spirit of it. Or are they only bad when the speech is the "right" kind of speech? Also as I said elsewhere in the thread, most of the time I find boycotts ineffective, especially when it would only jurt innocent people and when the change it creates is merely cosmetic. You're certainly free to boycott anything you wish, and to ask others to boycott, but you can't expect everyone to agree it's a good idea.
  - joshlegs 13y ago
    boycotts are fine. the problem is that people are taking personal issues and making them into corporate issues, and that's what is not OK. a person's private life and professional life are SEPARATE. You shouldn't punish Mozilla employees for things the person at the helm does IN HIS PRIVATE LIFE
nollidge 13y ago
> you can think the the beliefs are stupid, but you can still respect them. I have no idea what you're saying here. What does respecting stupid ideas even look like? EDIT: I respect people's right to hold and express stupid ideas. That does not mean I cannot discuss, at length and with vigor, how stupid they are, or encourage others to avoid financially supporting the people who hold those stupid ideas. I, too, have the right to free speech.

MichaelGG 13y ago

What does it mean to respect a belief, or have it equal to respecting the person? Some people would have others hung for dating outside their race - what does it entail exactly to "respect that person"? Like, admit they are human and should be allowed to hold their own beliefs? Because you can do that while holding someone in complete contempt.

anaphor 13y ago
It means that you attack their beliefs, not the person themself. Or you publicize their views and say that you disagree with them. In this case there are some people doing just that, which is fine. However IMO trying to launch a boycott against Firefox is silly and poorly thought out. You are only increasing the chance that people will be harrassed (disrespected) for their browser choice, and pushing people towards non-free software like Chrome and MSIE.

anaphor 13y ago

Finally someone who gets it. Free speech isn't about some abstract right that you can only technically exercise. Everyone also has the right to associate with whoever they chose. But launching public campaigns designed to restrict the speech of someone is not okay in my view, it's like a form of harrassment I think. Launching campaigns to _discredit their ideas_ however, is better I think. Also just launching a campaign to publicize their views is fine, as long as they're backed up with evidence (which they are in this case). I may be on the wrong side of this issue but I refuse to take part in boycotts because I think they're ineffective and just harmful, unless of course the product itself is harming people in some way.

nollidge 13y ago
No, neither of you get it. All you have is the right to speech free from governmental impedance; you do not have any sort of right to speech free from civil consequences. Boycotts are a form of free speech too, you know. How come you're not so antsy to defend those rights, I wonder?
- anaphor 13y ago
  While it may not technically be a violation of laws protecting freedom of speech, consider for example... - Organizing a group of bookstores to stop selling a certain book because you find it offensive for any reason - Using your privileged position at say, a conference, to get other speakers removed because you dislike them - as a web service provider, removing a website about a topic you find offensive None of these have anything to do with the government making a law that infringes on free speech. If they don't violate laws protecting free speech then they certainly piss all over the spirit of it. Or are they only bad when the speech is the "right" kind of speech? Also as I said elsewhere in the thread, most of the time I find boycotts ineffective, especially when it would only jurt innocent people and when the change it creates is merely cosmetic. You're certainly free to boycott anything you wish, and to ask others to boycott, but you can't expect everyone to agree it's a good idea.
- joshlegs 13y ago
  boycotts are fine. the problem is that people are taking personal issues and making them into corporate issues, and that's what is not OK. a person's private life and professional life are SEPARATE. You shouldn't punish Mozilla employees for things the person at the helm does IN HIS PRIVATE LIFE

nollidge 13y ago

> you can think the the beliefs are stupid, but you can still respect them. I have no idea what you're saying here. What does respecting stupid ideas even look like? EDIT: I respect people's right to hold and express stupid ideas. That does not mean I cannot discuss, at length and with vigor, how stupid they are, or encourage others to avoid financially supporting the people who hold those stupid ideas. I, too, have the right to free speech.