Skip to comments.Pathetic: New York Times writer justifies Mozilla's ouster of Brendan Eich
Posted on 04/07/2014 7:04:44 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The self-absorption of some on the left prevents them from even the most elementary shoe-on-the-other-foot perspective on the intolerance at Mozilla. Writing in a New York Times blog, Farhad Manjooo thinks it is fine to cater to the intolerance of those who see opposition to gay marriage as deserving loss of livelihood. This case is in his thinking different from, for example, the 1950s, when racism and sexism were rampant, and the Hollywood blacklisting of communists (long held up by the left as a national trauma that must never be forgotten).
Mozilla is not a normal company. It is an activist organization. Mozilla’s primary mission isn’t to make money but to spread open-source code across the globe in the eventual hope ofpromoting “the development of the Internet as a public resource.”
Like all software companies, Mozilla competes in two markets. First, obviously, it wants people to use its products instead of its rivals’ stuff. But its second market is arguably more challenging — the tight labor pool of engineers, designers, and other tech workers who make software.
When you consider the importance of that market, Mr. Eich’s position on gay marriage wasn’t some outré personal stance unrelated to his job; it was a potentially hazardous bit of negative branding in the labor pool, one that was making life difficult for current employees and plausibly reducing Mozilla’s draw to prospective workers.
Let’s apply this logic to the 1950s when many racists would not do business with or work in a company that hired blacks. By Manjoo’s logic, they should not have been compelled to do so. Catering to bigots can make business sense.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Would he have agreed with the Nazi’s when they were coming after the jews?
All well and good, until they come after him........
Yes, it seems liberals have redefined ‘tolerance’ to mean, ‘think like us or we’ll get you fired’. Is the next step in ‘tolerance’, ‘If you don’t think like us, we’ll shoot you’?
You know, there will come the day when the worm will turn, and to use another old hackneyed phrase, the shoe will be on the other foot. It is on that day that I hope all of these jerk liberal article writers with neanderthal brains will be fired for no good reason at all. I believe in do unto others that which they would do unto you. That day won’t come soon enough. And to use one last hackneyed phrase, I want to fight fire with fire.
Farhad Manchew? Really?
LGBTQ is NOT an ancestry.
It is a CHOICE.
People can DO whatever they want, but they must not force me into participating in it or “celebrating” it.
I will resist attempts that force me to comply with somebody’s worldview.
My worldview happens to identify LGBTQ behavior as SIN, and an ABOMINATION to God.
No such admonitions can be found in the Bible based on skin color. In fact, God punished Moses’ sister for her backbiting about Moses’ Ethiopian wife.
And pretty and witty and GAY.
Would he have agreed with the Nazis when they were coming after the jews?
If the Jews supported the ‘wrong’ party, yes.
“Where they burn books,someday they will burn people” This era will not end well!
Ich bin ein Eich!
Shouldn’t his last name be “Mench”, especially as he works for the NYT.
RE: LGBTQ is NOT an ancestry.
What is this Q all about? It used to be LGBT, now they added a Q?
Is Q a congenital thing as well?
Yeah, give in to whatever the Stink Of The Day is. Cowards.
The ONLY thing that mattered was keeping gay-friendly Google happy, and the Mozilla uproar does not adversely affect Google.
Q = “Questioning”
Also, the activists have added an “I” for “Intersex”
So, the acronym is now LGBTQI.
I think it’s Questioning. As long as you are not Questioning the “wrong thing” of course!
Well shoot. They almost might as well be an arm of Google.
Oh jes, with his “seven sisters” housing behind photo from SF. This entire commentary is explained by that alone— he’s a homosexual. And Manjoo is what derivation? Don’t think it’s hindi.... he’s moooslim. And they don’t have any homos, according to their leaders-— imagine that from the religion of peace that loves women so much they hate them.
The entire piece is a joke of self congratulation and falsehood, and textbook material of history repeating— the nazis were full of homos (even after the night of long knives)- it was a pagan boys queer club of violent insane cultist statists. No Christians(Protestant or not) or Jews, gypsies, Poles, Romanians etc. allowed.
What an ironic name for this dude, Man Joo. Farce if it wasn’t real.
And the Jews and many others DID support the wrong party. The whole development in Germany and Soviet Russia a concoction of just such politics. Time for a re-read of “In the Garden of the Beasts”
Sure enough. Anyone notice that mozilla launch page is advertising Mozilla for Android application. How long before Google acquires the client Mozilla. And then, thanks to previously unmapped data mining— the takeover of the US will be complete (partnered with similar tech-dicatators). It’s like Google is the Stasi of the coming New World Order. Key word— Order.
Noted. See #15.
I’ve seen this movie before.........it doesn’t end well..................
What do you mean "almost". When somebody accounts for more than 50% of your revenue, and they don't NEED you, they OWN you.
In their perverse universe a person could be Lesbian or Gay and still not Queer. And vice-verse.
BTW, the "queer" movement actually agrees in a way with social conservatives in that they believe gays shouldn't marry. They believe that no one should get married. I believe that when they speak out about this they tend to get shouted down by the gay mafia.
Mozilla should be perfectly free to dismiss their CEO if his or her views don’t fit the company’s image. Just like Hobby Lobby should be perfectly free to offer an insurance plan to their employees in line with the owner’s religious beliefs.
Let the market decide whether each of the companies did the right thing.
> What is this Q all about?
The Q is for queer.
Those are people who exhibit mannerisms of the opposite sex without engaging in homosexual relations.
First look who he works for, the paper that would report where Ann Frank was hiding.
Second, the brown shirts WERE QUEERS. Look who put Hitler in power.
To the extent I know I do not use Google. They are far too autocratic for me.