More views on the story
http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/04/04/brendan_eich_homophobic_past_should_we_forgive_him.html
And another view - from a gay rights advocate http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/04/03/the-hounding-of-brendan-eich/
What is a 'homophobic past'? Presumably it is something shameful to be found in this phenomenon which I might describe as the:
LIBERAL IMPERATIVE MOOD.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/04/04/mozilla-exec-out-of-job-for-gay-rights-intolerance-some-think-thats-intolerant/?tid=pm_pop
Troll properly DC. You can do far better than this.
I would say there is a difference between being against gay marriage and all out gay hate crimes especially away from any religious conviction. It all seems like a very heavy handed way of dealing with people's relgious convictions. Is being agaisnt gay marriage imposing restriction of gay people's rights. Like moose said, are we talking about relgion when we talk of marriage or are we talking of legality?
Can we say that law should impose itselfs over relgious practices? Well clearly it should but is marriage in the eyes of god a right that people should have? Or is it a belief? If its not a restriction of rights? Is it a crime to be anti-gay marriage?
They got a lot of practice though.
What utter cheek!
Bugger me!
Cultural Marxism wins again.
wtf
My daughter is a radical lesbian. Shes a great person. We disagree on a lot of things and in fact we both initially rejected Same Sex marriage as a religious /bourgeois concept.
However we have both changed now we support it as a rights/equality issue
Why should where and how two people touch each other be a legal issue if they both consent?
I have 5 brothers and sisters. Half of them are married half not - all have children.
I only got married as way back then as it was the only way to get a house mortgage from the fucking banks. They don't care now.
We are from a traditional Irish/ Australian Catholic family. Whatever that means.
As far as Mozilla goes it was a commercial not a moral position. Any idiot who gives money to anti same sex marriage organisation is a bigot - i don't like that I will boycott them - if it suits me. If it doesn't suit me I'll buy the product. Its not life and death. Its just commerce.
My position is that a marriage is a civil contract and should be overseen by the courts. If religions want to do some additional rituals then let them do it. I don't give a fuck if my local catholic priest/ muslim cleric/uniting church hippie/scientology auditor/salvo fascist doesn't want to marry gays, blacks, redheads or fucking clothing forums autistics. I just demand my government recognises them.
"The United States has undergone a cultural, moral and religious revolution. A militant secularism has arisen in this country. It has always had a hold on the intellectual and academic elites, but in the 1960s it captured the young in the universities and the colleges. "This is the basis of the great cultural war we're undergoing....We are two countries now. We are two countries morally, culturally, socially, and theologically. Cultural wars do not lend themselves to peaceful co-existence. One side prevails, or the other prevails. "The truth is that while conservatives won the Cold War with political and economic Communism, we've lost the cultural war with cultural Marxism, which I think has prevailed pretty much in the United States. It is now the dominant culture. Whereas those of us who are traditionalists, we are, if you will, the counterculture."
Fxh has a point most people just get on with their lives.
Could some please outline the difference in civil partnership and marriage?