• Xenforo Cloud is upgrading us to version 2.3.8 on Monday February 16th, 2026 at 12:00 AM PST. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Social ***mozilla Firefox ceo forced to resign for personal views****

Status
Not open for further replies.
So this is the same as the whole Chick-fil-A thing all over again ? A person expresses his/her views and someone else is offended by those.

Newsflash : Offend enough of them and they'll vote with there wallets and that's bad for business. The same people complaining about this are probably the same ones, that refuse to watch a movie, buy a PPV, listen to a song, etc because it might put money in the pocket of someone who's views they disagree with.
 
So you think I should be able to marry sheep? Or 9 year olds. Don't tread on me you say?

Nope. There are good reasons why the government's interest in protecting nine-year-olds from being raped by you overrides your right to marry even though you are a :eek::eek::eek::eek:phile and want to have sex with children. There are also good reasons for require more than one human to the marriage, even though you may love your sheep dearly, it lacks the capacity to consent to the relationship. I do think you should probably have the right to fuck your sheep if you own one though, if that's any solace to you.

So yeah, I'll tread on you for the right to marry a nine-year-old, or a sheep. But not for your right to marry another consenting adult because there is no good reason to override your right to equal protection of hte laws in that instance..
 
So this is the same as the whole Chick-fil-A thing all over again ? A person expresses his/her views and someone else is offended by those.

Newsflash : Offend enough of them and they'll vote with there wallets and that's bad for business. The same people complaining about this are probably the same ones, that refuse to watch a movie, buy a PPV, listen to a song, etc because it might put money in the pocket of someone who's views they disagree with.

I wouldn't say exactly the same. Everyone with a brain knew it was run by a religious family, not sure what they expected.
 
Calmete, you're putting up a great display of the intellectual feebleness of the homophobe. Keep on going, please. This is very entertaining.
 
If I don't like milk am I a cow bigot?

Let me know. Thx.

Nah. The cow doesn't really appreciate you sucking the milk out of it and drinking it anyway. I would bet the cow does feel my propensity to eat its flesh without regard to its feelings, pain, and suffering rather bigoted, though.

I am a cow bigot. I will understand if companies concerned about how my stance affects consumers decides to refuse to hire me or fire me.
 
Last edited:
It's not the bill or rights.

14th Amendment, aka the great fix to the deficiencies of the Bill of Rights.



To deny some people the institution of marriage while granting it to others is a violation of equal protection of the laws.

The state isn't denying some people the institution of marriage. Gay people can in fact marry members of the opposite sex.
 
about time we stand up for our fellow humans and fight against those who are against human rights.

You must still be young lol. I used to think this way too. It gets so fuckin tiring after a while though. This group is crying and getting mistreated, that group needs everybody to stand up for them, fuck. I just don't care about this shit anymore.
 
Language is constantly changing and evolving. An attempt to freeze it in time is not a legitimate interest. I've been to several marriages between two men performed by christian churches. De facto, theirs is a marriage and to call it otherwise is inaccurate.

Traditional use of a word is a horrible argument given that marriage has traditionally = polygamy which is not the modern use.
 
Traditional use of a word is a horrible argument given that marriage has traditionally = polygamy which is not the modern use.

Shh! The earth is 5000 years old and we're all the offspring of russell crowe and emma watson.
 
I wouldn't say exactly the same. Everyone with a brain knew it was run by a religious family, not sure what they expected.

I was suggesting more of a two sides of the same coin issue. When the CEO of Chick-fil-A thing happened you had people queuing up to buy, in support. This time it came back to bite him in the ass.

That's the way things are now. there are no secrets. Never say, write or post anything you don't want the whole world to know about.
 
The state isn't denying some people the institution of marriage. Gay people can in fact marry members of the opposite sex.

That's the same argument they used the bi-racial marriage fight. It is both a gender discrimination and a sexual orientation discrimination. Limiting the sex of the person you can marry is discrimination in the same way that limiting the race of the person you can marry. Additionally, because the law has no legitimate interest beyond preventing gay people from marrying each other because people don't like it and want to prevent other people from doing it, it is intentional discrimination without any good reason besides animus.
 
Can you back up your opinion using the actual bill of rights or does your opinion override that too?

Oh, well, if the Bill of Rights is the be-all-end-all, let's bring back slavery, guys.
 
people have opinions. If the head of a company supports discrimnation, then the people who disagree with him have the right to boycott his companies services. Nobody forced his being asked to leave, it just made business sense once the uproar begin. Thats how society works, dont see the issue with that at all.
Because it had nothing to do with market performance, nor his conduct within his capacity as a businessman and technological developer, and everything to do with an obvious political assassination in an unrelated sphere.
GL with that. We had this argument a few pages ago.
Yes, you lost that argument, nor are legality and ethics mutually inclusive topics, anyways. How many Firefox subscriptions did they lose over the revelation?
I dont see the distinct difference. You mean the ability to procreate?
Yes, but you don't even have to get that complicated. A man is not a woman, correct? So a man/woman are a different biological pairing than a man/man or woman/woman. It troubles me that some are unwilling to acknowledge basic biological realities. It's intellectually dishonest. We acknowledge the distinction in sexual preference with the terms "homosexual" and "heterosexual".

Is the word "homosexual" fundamentally "ibigoted"?

Bigotry cannot be allowed to be woven into the fabric of a business. I fully support that. Yet a third or fourth time: he was not conflating his personal life with his application as an executive. That was not happening.

It is not morally acceptable to "punish" someone for privately held views. This is the "thought police". It's intellectually, philosophically, idealistically totalitarian.
 
.

Yes, you lost that argument, nor are legality and ethics mutually inclusive topics, anyways.

If by lost you mean I don't agree with your letting bigots off the hook then yes.

Edit: lel call someone a bigot your good. Say short bus lol.
 
If by lost you mean I don't agree with your letting bigots off the hook then yes.
It's that "off the hook" where you got cogently dismantled.
Oh, well, if the Bill of Rights is the be-all-end-all, let's bring back slavery, guys.
LOL, kinda like: "I can't believe they gave black people more than 2/3 of a vote."
 
Oh for the love of Christ.

giphy.gif


Learn to read.

and civil union isn't the equivalent of marriage, so in response to your genius reply, I reply, learn to read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top