4 ms·

Read my HN comments to authenticate my id. You're doing it again: equating pro-traditional-marriage with anti-gay with hate. The last bogus inference is the on

Read my HN comments to authenticate my id. You're doing it again: equating pro-traditional-marriage with anti-gay with hate. The last bogus inference is the one that I called a non-issue.

coldpie 11y ago
You're right, I am equating those, because they are all equal. Whatever label you put on it, opposition to same-sex marriage makes the statement that you believe that love between same-sex couples is inferior to that between opposite-sex couples; that you need to ensure your children grow up to have that same belief; that homosexuals are something to disapprove of, something to fear; that you have a deep fear of your child turning out to be homosexual. Whether or not you come out and say those statements (and many of your "traditionalist" colleagues are not afraid to say them outright), all of those statements are clearly implied and wildly hurtful to homosexual individuals, and their friends and family. This is why you saw such a violent reaction to your being placed as CEO. The fact that you didn't last a week means that you and the Mozilla board are so blind to the harm that your positions inflict on your own employees and their friends and family that the appointment itself was taken as an insult, and this is ignoring your continued refusal to see the harm that you are doing. And I say this as a huge Mozilla fan (see my comments elsewhere in this thread). You made it clear that you will use a position of power, in this case money, to put down and insult those who work under you. Why should anyone have to put up with that? Mozilla employees are lucky to live in a time and industry when they could express their disapproval and have it acted upon in a positive way. I feel for others who are in less fortunate positions.
- rmxt 11y ago
  I find the arguments made on this page to be skeevy and dehumanizing to those that fall outside gender norms, but I'm posting it so to save you from wasting anymore electrons back and forth: http://discussingmarriage.org/ http://discussingmarriage.org/ Those are the "best" and least bigoted arguments that the "con-" side can muster.
- BrendanEich 11y ago
  Mozilla Corporation employees did not express disapproval while I was still CEO, and nothing from employees resulted in me leaving. When I had to tell key LGBT supporters I was resigning, they were aghast and asked me not to step down (from CEO; this was before it was clear that I was resigning from Mozilla). You're still in that echo chamber. I can get some sounds in, but they're distorted and attenuated. Here's one loud clue: marriage as a legally regulated institution has nothing to do with "love", or (contra Kennedy for the majority) "self expression". If that were all that's involved in marriage, it should not be subject to state coercion at all. I'll leave it at that, and thank rmxt for dropping a link.
  - coldpie 11y ago
    All right. Keep hurting people for no reason, I guess. I hope it at least makes you happy, so someone is benefitting from the needless harm.
    - BrendanEich 11y ago
      Who was hurt by law? Remember, CA had its equivalent version of statutory marriage, called civil unions in other jurisdictions and called Domestic Partner law in CA. Mark Leno among others said D.P. law was good enough, both when it passed and as amended. I agreed eventually, and stood firm. Fat lot of good that did me.
      - coldpie 11y ago
        LGBT youth are twice as likely as hetero students to attempt suicide. http://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth.htm http://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth.htm Members of the LGBT community are about 150% as likely as heteros to smoke. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/campaign/tips/groups/lgbt.html http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/campaign/tips/groups/lgbt.html Without access to marriage and the rights it brings, children of same-sex couples had to go through legal ordeals, facing orphanage, if their biological parent dies despite another (now single) parent being available. Other marriage benefits, especially hospital visitation and rights after a partner's death, weren't conferred to partners as they weren't legally recognized. Civil unions were obviously at best a stepping stone. "Separate but equal" does not have a good history in this country. You've heard these arguments before, > Fat lot of good that did me. so tell us. How have you been harmed by gay marriage's legalization? In what way does your objection to your employees' having rights not disqualify you from the CEO position?

Read my HN comments to authenticate my id. You're doing it again: equating pro-traditional-marriage with anti-gay with hate. The last bogus inference is the one that I called a non-issue.

coldpie 11y ago

You're right, I am equating those, because they are all equal. Whatever label you put on it, opposition to same-sex marriage makes the statement that you believe that love between same-sex couples is inferior to that between opposite-sex couples; that you need to ensure your children grow up to have that same belief; that homosexuals are something to disapprove of, something to fear; that you have a deep fear of your child turning out to be homosexual. Whether or not you come out and say those statements (and many of your "traditionalist" colleagues are not afraid to say them outright), all of those statements are clearly implied and wildly hurtful to homosexual individuals, and their friends and family. This is why you saw such a violent reaction to your being placed as CEO. The fact that you didn't last a week means that you and the Mozilla board are so blind to the harm that your positions inflict on your own employees and their friends and family that the appointment itself was taken as an insult, and this is ignoring your continued refusal to see the harm that you are doing. And I say this as a huge Mozilla fan (see my comments elsewhere in this thread). You made it clear that you will use a position of power, in this case money, to put down and insult those who work under you. Why should anyone have to put up with that? Mozilla employees are lucky to live in a time and industry when they could express their disapproval and have it acted upon in a positive way. I feel for others who are in less fortunate positions.

rmxt 11y ago
I find the arguments made on this page to be skeevy and dehumanizing to those that fall outside gender norms, but I'm posting it so to save you from wasting anymore electrons back and forth: http://discussingmarriage.org/ http://discussingmarriage.org/ Those are the "best" and least bigoted arguments that the "con-" side can muster.
BrendanEich 11y ago
Mozilla Corporation employees did not express disapproval while I was still CEO, and nothing from employees resulted in me leaving. When I had to tell key LGBT supporters I was resigning, they were aghast and asked me not to step down (from CEO; this was before it was clear that I was resigning from Mozilla). You're still in that echo chamber. I can get some sounds in, but they're distorted and attenuated. Here's one loud clue: marriage as a legally regulated institution has nothing to do with "love", or (contra Kennedy for the majority) "self expression". If that were all that's involved in marriage, it should not be subject to state coercion at all. I'll leave it at that, and thank rmxt for dropping a link.
- coldpie 11y ago
  All right. Keep hurting people for no reason, I guess. I hope it at least makes you happy, so someone is benefitting from the needless harm.
  - BrendanEich 11y ago
    Who was hurt by law? Remember, CA had its equivalent version of statutory marriage, called civil unions in other jurisdictions and called Domestic Partner law in CA. Mark Leno among others said D.P. law was good enough, both when it passed and as amended. I agreed eventually, and stood firm. Fat lot of good that did me.
    - coldpie 11y ago
      LGBT youth are twice as likely as hetero students to attempt suicide. http://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth.htm http://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth.htm Members of the LGBT community are about 150% as likely as heteros to smoke. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/campaign/tips/groups/lgbt.html http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/campaign/tips/groups/lgbt.html Without access to marriage and the rights it brings, children of same-sex couples had to go through legal ordeals, facing orphanage, if their biological parent dies despite another (now single) parent being available. Other marriage benefits, especially hospital visitation and rights after a partner's death, weren't conferred to partners as they weren't legally recognized. Civil unions were obviously at best a stepping stone. "Separate but equal" does not have a good history in this country. You've heard these arguments before, > Fat lot of good that did me. so tell us. How have you been harmed by gay marriage's legalization? In what way does your objection to your employees' having rights not disqualify you from the CEO position?