3 ms·

He does not have to. It is his personal belief. We must not force him to renounce his believe in exchange for his job.

• ralfn 12y ago
  It wasn't about his personal belief. He actively donated. He picked a side in what is still an ongoing globalized war for human rights. Secondly, freedom of speech does not entail freedom of societal consequences of speech. It just means the government can't punish you for being an asshole. It doesn't mean anyone is forced to hang out with assholes. Nor are we forced to use products of which appearantly funds end up trying to oppress other human beings. The answer to moral criticism of corporatism is always 'vote with your wallet'. Now you are saying we are not allowed to do just that? That we must treat every company equally irregardless of their political actions? (actions yes, not opinions) Also, the exact position of gay marriage in the US is completely irrelevant -- that notion alone testifies a misplaced arrogance. Mozilla operates in a very large globalized world. A world where in many countries gays are still oppressed -- and i don't mean in the you-cant-get-married-way but in the we-are-going-to-kill-you way. This is a large globalized war for human rights, and he picked sides. That has consequences. Here's a question: what if he contributed to Al Queda? He didn't fly those planes -- it's just freedom of speech, right? He should be able to be CEO of Mozilla, right? What an assholes we are if we would stop using Firefox because of that, right? I realize it's a straw-man argument. His actions are not on the same level. But it proves that the notion that political actions should be free of consequence is plain wrong. The whole point of political actions is that you want something to change. People who believe that change is for the worse, are free to fight you with any legal means including voting with their wallet or refusing to work for somebody who they perceive to be their moral enemy. Yes, that makes a person less qualified for certain types of jobs. It made sense for Mozilla to fire him for financial reasons -- but i kind of hope, moral reasons played a part as well. And he did choose to stick with his guns, so he lost a standoff he chose to be in.
  • Zancarius 12y ago
    > This is a large globalized war for human rights, and he picked sides. That has consequences. Here's a question: what if he contributed to Al Queda? He didn't fly those planes -- it's just freedom of speech, right? I think this is why it's difficult to have a sensible discussion on the matter, because the overwhelming stench of hyperbole frightens off everyone else but the flies.
  • dodyg 12y ago
    You lost me at "ongoing globalized war for human rights".