Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

New Mozilla Ceo A "hateful" Anti-Gay?


Wanderer7

Recommended Posts

It is not easy when one does not feel welcome; however, when a family event is happening you should be there; there is no need for an invite.  It is obvious that many faithful people just don't know how to handle the complexities of a gay relationship. In the extended family situation it can be easier to handle. Everyone there knows you are a member of the family. Everyone knows you belong so it is harder, not impossible, but harder to exclude or to insult. 

 

The fact that you show up demonstrates your interest and commitment to the family. The fact that you, like every other person at the reunion, is a sinner is irrelevant.  It always takes two to have a conflict and one side is seldom the problem 100% of the time. Hurt feelings cause us to act in ways that tell the other we don't care; it is not that we don't care, but that our feelings are hurt. We have to decide what is most important.  Family, even the ornery ones, are still great to have around even if only for reunions. 

I appreciate your thoughts.  And like you, I know how things are suppose to be.  But sometimes reality does not match what should be.  When I first came out and this policy was started, I wanted to ask them how they could spend 3 hours every sunday learning about the Savior and the example He sat in treating sinnners.  I wondered what they thought about the counsel of the bretheren on how to treat gay family members.  But that is how things are.  I have talked to my father about this issue since I felt that as patriarch of the family he sets the tone for the family.  He told me that they all got together and agreed that as long as one family member objected, or felt uncomfortable having me around, they would respect that discomfort.  So that is the basis of the policy.  I do have a relationship with some of my family, but never as a whole group.  Maybe some day, things will change.  Who knows.

Link to comment

I was specific that there were no policies; it's simply the culture that filters things out. Yet you, as usual, continue to put your own strawman spin on things in order to shoot it down.

 

It doesn't matter what evidence I provide, you're going to dismiss it. That's the way you work with things that don't fit your alternate-reality worldview. Being someone who keeps close tabs on what software developers in SV (and elsewhere) think and say, it is clearly evident that there is a culture of PC attitudes that breeds what amounts to intolerance for anyone who doesn't fit the "mold". Read the comments on the Huffpost article. Maybe if you try to have an open mind, you'll get the picture.

If you were to have posted that some high tech companies expect their workers to work long hours which can make it difficult to fulfill family responsibilities then I would have not disagreed with you.  But that was not anything like what you said.  Evidently you forgot the accusation that you made towards SV companies.  Let me refresh your memory.  This is what you said.

 

Real diversity is not tolerated or appreciated. For instance, SV is a very family unfriendly place. It's also very unfriendly to those with traditional religious beliefs. The arrogance that is readily evident in so many SV companies makes the claim that they have any regard for real values ludicrous.

 

 

 

High expectations of working long hours is NOT an attitude against diversity.  If you think that working long hours is some kind of discrimination against a particluar group, then you have NO IDEA what it feels like to be discriminated against.

 

And though you also made the claim that SV companies are unfriendly against those with religious beliefs, you have YET to provide any basis for that comment.  Working hard does not mean there is prejudice against religion.  You are only exposing this current trend to cry religious discrimination when no such discrimination exists.  Christian churches have no problem discriminating against gays and to justify that position they try desperately to cry that they are the victim of discrimination.  Obviously a tact you agree with.

 

Your attempt to attack me is only underlines your complete lack of any facts to support your eronious position.  

Link to comment

And that is the exception rather than the rule, especially in the SV software developer culture that caters to young, unmarried work-all-the-time types where the right attitudes and PC "values" are required in order to fit in.

 

I don't agree with this statement at all.  Yes it is true that there are some high tech companies that expect long hours from their employees, but one of the hall marks of these companies is that the hours tend to be VERY flexible.  My neighbor that lives down stairs works for Apple for example.  He does work long hours. but, his time is very flexible.  Sometimes he goes to work at 7 in the morning.  Sometimes he doesn't leave until 10.  Sometimes he is home by 2 in the afternoon and sometimes he gets home after 10.  This is very typical of SV companies.  There is no ridged show up at 9 and leave at 5 kind of structure.  He doesn't even have to ask anyone if he can take time off for family events.  He just does it.  As long as he is getting his job done when expected, then no one cares.  That is hardly a environment that is anti family.  If long hours is a criteria for being anti family, then being an apostle or even bishop, stake president, etc. would also probably be an anti family position.  Would you accuse the church of being anti family?  Hardly.

Link to comment

Yet you, as usual, continue to put your own strawman spin on things in order to shoot it down.

 

It doesn't matter what evidence I provide, you're going to dismiss it. That's the way you work with things that don't fit your alternate-reality worldview. 

Attacking me personally does not support your statements, it only shows that you have nothing to support your erroneous position.  If you have evidence, then present it.  So far is all you have said is that some SV companies expect long hours out of their employees.  (which I have agreed with you)  Do you have anything else?   If you don't have any other support for your position then just say so.  Don't try and make this about me.

Link to comment

Christian churches have no problem discriminating against gays and to justify that position they try desperately to cry that they are the victim of discrimination.  Obviously a tact you agree with.

 

Your attempt to attack me is only underlines your complete lack of any facts to support your eronious position.  

 

I suspect the irony of this is lost on you.

Link to comment

Attacking me personally does not support your statements, it only shows that you have nothing to support your erroneous position.  If you have evidence, then present it.  So far is all you have said is that some SV companies expect long hours out of their employees.  (which I have agreed with you)  Do you have anything else?   If you don't have any other support for your position then just say so.  Don't try and make this about me.

 

Evidently personal attacks - by your definition - involve disagreeing with you. However, I stand by my statement that your SOP is to dismiss anything I present as in error, as lacking in fact, as lacking in evidence, and as laughable.

 

On the other hand, all you have to do to understand the depth of the intolerance and anti-religious fervor exhibited by the politically correct we-support-SSM mentality in SV it to read the comments in the HuffPost article referred to in the OP.

 

I find that the intolerance exhibited by many (not all) SSM supporters, and especially those in high tech industries such as SV, rivals anything generated by their hated fundamentalist Christian enemies. Having the ability to work in high tech often breeds a judgmental arrogance fueled by the perception that they're "smarter" than other people. Hence, they feel they can dictate authoritatively what is right and what is wrong, as evidenced by how they're treating Eich. Sounds like exactly the same accusations made against Christian fundamentalists.

 

Again, read the comments before you go out on this limb that SV is just benign and there's no cultural pressure to conform to PC thought - including supporting SSM.

Link to comment

I don't agree with this statement at all.  Yes it is true that there are some high tech companies that expect long hours from their employees, but one of the hall marks of these companies is that the hours tend to be VERY flexible.  My neighbor that lives down stairs works for Apple for example.  He does work long hours. but, his time is very flexible.  Sometimes he goes to work at 7 in the morning.  Sometimes he doesn't leave until 10.  Sometimes he is home by 2 in the afternoon and sometimes he gets home after 10.  This is very typical of SV companies.  There is no ridged show up at 9 and leave at 5 kind of structure.  He doesn't even have to ask anyone if he can take time off for family events.  He just does it.  As long as he is getting his job done when expected, then no one cares.  That is hardly a environment that is anti family.  If long hours is a criteria for being anti family, then being an apostle or even bishop, stake president, etc. would also probably be an anti family position.  Would you accuse the church of being anti family?  Hardly.

 

I noticed that you totally ignored my point in my post about the requirement for the correct attitude towards SSM in order to fit in.

 

It's rather evident from the HuffPost comments - and from the comments in the other articles I've read, some of which included tweets about Eich from Mozilla employees - that a cultural influence thrives in SV that demands acceptance of SSM, and denigrates those who disagree on religious or other grounds. That should be of concern, because such attitudes if left unchecked eventually spill over into active persecution, through cultural or legal means, as history shows.

Link to comment

While discrimination by Gays and their supporters is not unknown. It is tiny compared to discrimination against them.

 

Unknown? You make it sound like it is the exception to the rule.  Tell Chick-fil-A that; or a baker; breadmaker, photographer, Mormons, CEO of Mozilla, should we stop the list now or continue?

 

Attempting to portray either group as the victim does little to provide a solution.  There are subgroups that are just as guilty as the other and on one is the bigger victim. 

Link to comment

Unknown? You make it sound like it is the exception to the rule.  Tell Chick-fil-A that; or a baker; breadmaker, photographer, Mormons, CEO of Mozilla, should we stop the list now or continue?

 

Attempting to portray either group as the victim does little to provide a solution.  There are subgroups that are just as guilty as the other and on one is the bigger victim. 

 

When you go into the public sphere it is not discrimination to be called on your actions.

Link to comment

Evidently personal attacks - by your definition - involve disagreeing with you. However, I stand by my statement that your SOP is to dismiss anything I present as in error, as lacking in fact, as lacking in evidence, and as laughable.

 

On the other hand, all you have to do to understand the depth of the intolerance and anti-religious fervor exhibited by the politically correct we-support-SSM mentality in SV it to read the comments in the HuffPost article referred to in the OP.

 

I find that the intolerance exhibited by many (not all) SSM supporters, and especially those in high tech industries such as SV, rivals anything generated by their hated fundamentalist Christian enemies. Having the ability to work in high tech often breeds a judgmental arrogance fueled by the perception that they're "smarter" than other people. Hence, they feel they can dictate authoritatively what is right and what is wrong, as evidenced by how they're treating Eich. Sounds like exactly the same accusations made against Christian fundamentalists.

 

Again, read the comments before you go out on this limb that SV is just benign and there's no cultural pressure to conform to PC thought - including supporting SSM.

Disagreeing is fine.  It is why I am active on this board. But on this board, if you make a statement and ask for a CFR you are expected to present the proof or withdraw the claim.   I want to see the other side of things.  But when someone makes a claim that I disagree with, I expect some facts to back up their claim when asked.  You have provided NOTHING to support your claim except that some high tech companies expect long work hours.  If you are using comments from a newspaper article as your proof of discrimination against families and religion as PROOF, I could show you thousands of comments about Mormons that are quite distaseful in comment sections.  Would you also take those as PROOF that what they say about Mormons is true?  Let me know.  I can provide you with some "proof" about Mormons if you wish from like sources.

Link to comment

Disagreeing is fine.  It is why I am active on this board. But on this board, if you make a statement and ask for a CFR you are expected to present the proof or withdraw the claim.   I want to see the other side of things.  But when someone makes a claim that I disagree with, I expect some facts to back up their claim when asked.  You have provided NOTHING to support your claim except that some high tech companies expect long work hours.  If you are using comments from a newspaper article as your proof of discrimination against families and religion as PROOF, I could show you thousands of comments about Mormons that are quite distaseful in comment sections.  Would you also take those as PROOF that what they say about Mormons is true?  Let me know.  I can provide you with some "proof" about Mormons if you wish from like sources.

 

You make a claim from your experience, and I make a claim from my experience.

 

The difference, according to you, is that my claim is invalid unless I respond to your "CFR". And when I provide other evidence, such as the comments section of the article in the OP, it is summarily dismissed by you as irrelevant and "proof" that I don't respond to your misplaced CFRs.

 

Much like the alternate reality you concoct to support SSM, you twist the board rules to claim some kind of "victory" in this case.

 

I'll note in passing, that I'm talking about attitudes of SSM supporters in the context of Silicon Valley's PC culture of intolerance. Certainly comments provided at the bottom of the article give us evidence about their attitudes - and not, as you erroneously claim, evidence that their attitudes are justified or reflective of "truth". Your frothing about PROOF simply indicates that you don't grasp what I'm really saying.

 

It's become clear that since I oppose SSM for some very good reasons, I need to be demonized, dismissed and vilified by you. It sounds like a manifestation of the same culture of marginalization in SV that is so clearly manifest in the situation surrounding EIch. The misrepresentations made in the comments sections about those who disagree with SSM are also clear evidence of the trend to intimidate SSM opponents rather than engage them with cogent responses. My experience on this board has been very consistent with that.

Link to comment

Possibly, to be fair we have had it easy for far too long.

 

I find this fairly insightful. Since the standards of the world are fundamentally inconsistent with the Restored Gospel, it has been rather unusual to have some breathing room, so to speak. I suspect that era is soon to come to a close.

Link to comment

You make a claim from your experience, and I make a claim from my experience.

 

Except you have not even listed ANY of the discrimination you have experienced except that long hours are expected.  So at least share with us some of the horrible discrimination you have experienced because you have a family. Did these evil software companies ridicule your family?  Did they make you sit in the corner at lunch away from all of the other single people working for them?  Did they try and prevent you from believing in Mormonism?  Just tell us what you base your personal experience on.

 

 

 

The difference, according to you, is that my claim is invalid unless I respond to your "CFR". And when I provide other evidence, such as the comments section of the article in the OP, it is summarily dismissed by you as irrelevant and "proof" that I don't respond to your misplaced CFRs.

 

I didn't dismiss your CFR, I only asked that if you propose comment secitions from newspaper articles as PROOFof SV tech behavior  if you also accept as PROOF  comment sections on Mormonism was of Mormonism.  You can't claim one as proof and not also acknowledge the other as proof.  I felt like I was perfectly willing to accept newspaper article comments as proof if you were willing to do the same.  Are you?

 

 

Much like the alternate reality you concoct to support SSM, you twist the board rules to claim some kind of "victory" in this case.

 

 

 

At this point, I don't think I have to twist much of anything to claim that SSM is probably going to be the law of the land in the next couple of years.  I don't have to make accusations against tech companies in SV to make my case, i have a whole slew of legal rulings that make a pretty convincing case for me.

 

I'll note in passing, that I'm talking about attitudes of SSM supporters in the context of Silicon Valley's PC culture of intolerance. Certainly comments provided at the bottom of the article give us evidence about their attitudes - and not, as you erroneously claim, evidence that their attitudes are justified or reflective of "truth". Your frothing about PROOF simply indicates that you don't grasp what I'm really saying.

 

 

Well you are claiming PC intolerance, but yet to provide any discrimination you have received from working in the indurstry.  It seems you are the only one that is having a problem with diversity.  So far, you haven't said anything about your personal experience with religious and family persecution except that there are long work hours.

 

It's become clear that since I oppose SSM for some very good reasons, I need to be demonized, dismissed and vilified by you. It sounds like a manifestation of the same culture of marginalization in SV that is so clearly manifest in the situation surrounding EIch. The misrepresentations made in the comments sections about those who disagree with SSM are also clear evidence of the trend to intimidate SSM opponents rather than engage them with cogent responses. My experience on this board has been very consistent with that.

 

 

OK now for the predictable personal attacks again.  CFR ONE post where I have demonized you or vilified you.  Of course I have questioned your proof because at this point, you have only used comments in the newspaper section.  And I only asked if you felt that was a ressonable place to find proof.  If you think it is, then you have to also acknowledge that comments about Mormons found in like comment sections is also true.  Simple question.  Is comment sections in newspaper proof of truth?
 
I am not being unreasonable here.  You made a claim, I am simply asking you for proof why you made the claim. And if you can only use newspaper comments as proof of your claims, can others make use of newspaper articles about Mormonism as proof of the truth they state.  This isn't really difficult.  And it is not personal.  I just want people who make clams to back up their claims with facts.  It is kinda how we do things around here.  If you are confused about that, read the guidelines, especially concerning CFR's
Link to comment

It's interesting, reading this thread has made me reflect back on my time working at Intel in Silicon Valley. I had been at BYU and my mission for the 7 previous years. So it was very different going out to Northern CA. But the level of respect for my beliefs and everyone's beliefs at Intel was inspiring. It was there that I first met someone who was participating in Ramadan. It was the first time I actually discussed Ash Wednesday and Lent with Catholics who were living it. I had a friend there who was a vegetarian for religious reasons. Everyone knew I was Mormon and I never felt any kind of discrimination. And, of course, there was a gay couple who had been together for something like 15 years. They sat together in the company cafeteria every morning and drank their coffee before heading off to the separate jobs. These are all people who were friends of mine.

Link to comment
Will being LDS (I don't know if he is LDS, but there is the Prop 8-LDS association) bar people from achieving professional success in the future?

 

I've heard people with some power in employment scenarios boldly proclaim that over their dead bodies....  But I've also seen the opposite where an LDS person is suddenly noticed as the rational and grounded choice after halting between two others.

 

As simple as it is, perhaps knowing and understanding LDS doctrine is like knowing and understanding a parable for many people, and that helps and saves us as we move through society.

Link to comment
No such conspiracy exists

 

 

As such?  Perhaps.  But getting back to the OP, are you going to claim that no person or person(s) ever targeted or publicized or threatened to publicize Prop 8 donors in hopes that those people would be ostracized in some way such as losing their job or hurting their business?

Link to comment

It's interesting, reading this thread has made me reflect back on my time working at Intel in Silicon Valley. I had been at BYU and my mission for the 7 previous years. So it was very different going out to Northern CA. But the level of respect for my beliefs and everyone's beliefs at Intel was inspiring. It was there that I first met someone who was participating in Ramadan. It was the first time I actually discussed Ash Wednesday and Lent with Catholics who were living it. I had a friend there who was a vegetarian for religious reasons. Everyone knew I was Mormon and I never felt any kind of discrimination. And, of course, there was a gay couple who had been together for something like 15 years. They sat together in the company cafeteria every morning and drank their coffee before heading off to the separate jobs. These are all people who were friends of mine.

 

At the top of my list for why I love living in San Francisco is the diversity.  I love the amalgamation of different races, beliefs, attitudes and outlooks on life.  I have lived in the suburbs which tend to stratify much more than a city environment, and it is just not the same for me.  It is just a rich part of life that I cherish.

Link to comment

At the top of my list for why I love living in San Francisco is the diversity.  I love the amalgamation of different races, beliefs, attitudes and outlooks on life.  I have lived in the suburbs which tend to stratify much more than a city environment, and it is just not the same for me.  It is just a rich part of life that I cherish.

 

I adore the Painted Ladies, but they are well out of my price range.

Link to comment

Will being LDS (I don't know if he is LDS, but there is the Prop 8-LDS association) bar people from achieving professional success in the future? Thoughts?

Unless one is prone to spin the facts to support a desired conclusion, there is no evidence that being LDS and supporting Prop 8 is a bar.

Link to comment

This story just came out about the new CEO of Mozilla who donated $1,000 dollars to Prop 8. Now LGBT activists are labeling him as hateful and boycotting Mozilla.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/27/mozilla-ceo-prop-8-_n_5042660.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

I'm not sure I read his motives as hateful, but it begs the question. Will being LDS (I don't know if he is LDS, but there is the Prop 8-LDS association) bar people from achieving professional success in the future? Thoughts?

Oops, you used the phrase "begs the question" incorrectly.

 

As explained on this site:

 

"Begging the question" is a form of logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself. When one begs the question, the initial assumption of a statement is treated as already proven without any logic to show why the statement is true in the first place.

A simple example would be "I think he is unattractive because he is ugly." The adjective "ugly" does not explain why the subject is "unattractive" -- they virtually amount to the same subjective meaning, and the proof is merely a restatement of the premise. The sentence has begged the question.

What is it Not?

To beg the question does not mean "to raise the question." (e.g. "It begs the question, why is he so dumb?") This is a common error of usage made by those who mistake the word "question" in the phrase to refer to a literal question. Sadly, the error has grown more and more common with time, such that even journalists, advertisers, and major mass media entities have fallen prey to "BTQ Abuse."

Link to comment

http://www.thewire.com/technology/2014/04/mozillas-ceo-resigns-following-criticism-of-his-anti-gay-marriage-donation/360132/

 

Well, now he has resigned. BTW, it turns out he is Catholic, so I was wrong about this being about Mormons. But the main point still stands. If you dare oppose the left, especially on matters of "gay rights", you will be labeled, demonized, and hounded from any position of any importance. I predict more incidents of this type over the coming months and years. Blood in the water, as they say. 

Link to comment

http://www.thewire.com/technology/2014/04/mozillas-ceo-resigns-following-criticism-of-his-anti-gay-marriage-donation/360132/

 

Well, now he has resigned. BTW, it turns out he is Catholic, so I was wrong about this being about Mormons. But the main point still stands. If you dare oppose the left, especially on matters of "gay rights", you will be labeled, demonized, and hounded from any position of any importance. I predict more incidents of this type over the coming months and years. Blood in the water, as they say. 

 

I oppose any bat crap crazy idea about law, whether from the political left or the political right. IE; Ted Olson isn't exactly a political lefty

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...