On Thursday, Mozilla CEO and JavaScript creator Brendan Eich was pressured to resign over a 2008 donation in support of California’s Prop 8. And of course, tolerance thugs (many of whom contributed to Obama’s 2008 anti-gay marriage campaign) spent the rest of the day gleefully waving their trophy scalp.

Conservative radio host Tammy Bruce gave Mozilla and the “gay gestapo” hell for transforming the company into a “bastion of intolerance and punishment.”

Related:

‘Should he be impeached?’ A reminder about who had same definition of marriage as ex-Mozilla CEO

‘The whole episode disgusts me’: Andrew Sullivan defends ex-Mozilla CEO and tolerance mob victim Brendan Eich

‘LOLOLOL’: Mozilla blasted for claim company built on ‘diverse views’

John Ondrasik notices something strange about Firefox after Mozilla CEO resigns

‘Really stepped in it’: Users #uninstall after Mozilla forces out CEO for support of traditional marriage

  • End abortion,sodomy&divorce!

    this world has lost its sense of sin…when even immoral behavior, an abomination in the eyes of God, is being proclaimed as a human right

    • Orpheus75

      As did every other society and civilization right before their collapse and ruin.

    • sgosher

      ………….sense of sin, common sense and a whole lotta other things.

    • Frogmouth

      If there is a god (there isn’t) and he created humans and gave them free will (he didn’t because see previous), then that free will gives us the human right to engage in whatever behavior we choose.

      Morality is a societal construct.

      • David Carpenter

        Perhaps you have missed the point…….I don’t care if you are gay, so why do you feel it necessary to TELL me there is no God? Because you say there is no God, I suppose that makes it true. Yell loud enough and all who don’t agree with you, will simply back down and leave.
        That’s the point that this gay woman, Tammy Bruce is pointing out. Even though she is gay, she feels that it wrong to punish someone because they don’t believe as she does.
        I will never understand how and why some people feel that their point of view is more valid than someone else’s and because of it others should suffer.

        • Frogmouth

          A: Not gay.
          B: Who’s yelling?
          C: I agree with Tammy Bruce’s beliefs that it is wrong to punish someone for differing beliefs.

          • jr565

            When you say you agree with her belief that its wrong to punish someone for differing beliefs, on what basis are you determining that its wrong? Is is it merely your belief and your opinion or is there something objective beyond that belief. Because if I believe that its ok to punish people named frogmouth for disagreeing with me, how am I wrong?
            Surely, both you and Tammy are suggesting a morality higher than your opinion. If not, then why are you even uttering it, as if we should care what your opinion is.

          • Frogmouth

            Calm down. Proofread and repost. I can’t make head or tails of most of this.

            I don’t care if you care what my opinion is. Why should I? But I have every right to it. Ain’t America great?

          • jr565

            I never said you didn’t have a right to your opinion. You do. But who doesn’t have a right to their opinion. Is that all that morality is for you though? your opinion?
            Who doesn’t have an opinion?

        • Larenzo1

          He will never get the point but good comment.

      • Freddy Neat Shee

        If there is no morality, then there is only survival of the fittest. In which case, absent any sort of deity, you would still have to behave in a way that allows the species to survive. You do want the human species to survive, right?

        If we get rid of all morality and just focus on the “survival of the fittest”, then it would seem that some behaviour is contradictory to the survival of the species. Some of this behaviour happens to align perfectly with what others may refer to as “morality”, such as not murdering your offspring, getting into relationships that may encourage the propagation of the species, etc.

        In short, I can say with certainty that there is an absolute morality, because your attempts to say absolutely that morality is only relative is, itself, an absolute statement.

        • Frogmouth

          Where did I say that there is no morality? I said morals are subject to societal pressures. Big difference.

          Survival of the fittest seems to work out okay among species who have no concept of morality. Still plenty of fish and lions and frogs and snakes and spiders and bees and…well, you get the idea.

          • Freddy Neat Shee

            …and of all the species of animal that mates for life, not a single one of them have same-sex lifelong pairings. Which means that gay “marriage” is an unnatural societal concept, designed specifically by people to promote the *least* fit among us.

            As to your ignorance of the full ramifications of subjective morality, I propose a thought experiment: Your definition of morals being subject to societal pressure means that there is nothing morally wrong with what the Germans did to their own people in WWII, because a majority of German society elected the regime responsible for what most consider to be atrocities. They believed they were doing the morally right thing, and since the majority of Germans believed it was morally right, or at least that it was not morally wrong, it’s all OK, right? The only other possibility is that there is an objective morality, an objective moral standard by which we can judge and say that it’s not OK to kill 12 million of your own people. So which is it? Was the Holocaust morally justified? Or is there an objective moral standard?

          • jr565

            All frogmouth can say is that its his opinion that the nazis were wrong. Not because there really is a problem with mass murder, but that he personally has a logical problem with it. But if the nazis didn’t have a problem with it, then?
            I don’t really see how frogmouth is judging the actions of others.or more specifically, if he’s not applying an objective morality to their actions, then all he’s doing is expressing his opinion about their actions which is based solely on his opinions. And therefore, why does it matter if he thinks something is wrong or right? why would his opinion be more right than nazis slaughtering Jews?
            Do secular humanists not even view secular humanism objectively? I don’t see how they could, but if they don’t then their value system is baseless.

          • Frogmouth

            Ad hominem.

          • DixieAngel_76

            But we’re not fish, lions, frogs, snakes, spiders or bees, we’re humans and we’re different than other creatures. We alone have the capacity to reason.

          • Mohammed’s pink swastika

            All of those animals that you described kill each other to survive. Do they have a sense of morality? The Scriptures of atheism (Darwinism) lead you to believe that survival of the fittest is the natural way of life on Earth. If that is the case, then there is no morality. Therefore you would have no other choice but to agree that morality comes from somewhere else other than society.
            If one man murders another man while fighting a war so that he will survive, is that a moral act?

            You can adhere to the laws of man and still be immoral.

      • jr565

        So, if someone were to rape and murder your mother and said that all morality were a social construct in response to people holding him to some moral standard that raping and murder was wrong, you would argue?

        • Frogmouth

          Yes, because our moral code says those things are wrong. This was not always the case in human history, though. Read your Old Testament.

          • jr565

            But our moral code would only be a societal construct. You know what’s also a societal construct? marriage. So if society says its a man and a woman, then that’s what society says it is. Where are you coming up with any argument that would refute that? And how are you calling people bigots for believing in the societal construct? It thought that was what determines morality.
            Why was the slave owner wrong? Why is restricting gay marriage wrong? Why is murder wrong? Etc etc.

          • Frogmouth

            Thanks for proving my point. The man/woman marriage societal construct can be changed if society agrees to do so.

            Slavery was once accepted as the norm. Society decided it was wrong. This country even had a war to help settle the issue. No more slavery.

            Murder and rape were not only acceptable, the behavior was codified in the Old Testament.

          • jr565

            Sure it could, but it could also stay the same if people want it to stay the same. How are courts saying that what people decide on the state level is wrong if it somehow restricts marriage for gays?
            Eich donated money to maintain a law that was on the books agreed to by a majority of Californians that said marriage would be what it was. And your problem with that decision?

            When gays push for equality in marriage they are arguing morality on absolute grounds, not on the will of the majority or subjectively.
            If you want to argue that majority rules, then if the majority says that gays shouldn’t marry what should that mean? How are you arguing otherwise.
            The problem is that whenever gays argue for gay marriage equality its always on absolutist grounds. Only if there is no absolute morality, then its not valid to argue as if there were.

          • Frogmouth

            Exactly. If enough people want the law to be changed, it will be changed, even if the minority consider it to be an abomination.

            The state level law is a more slippery slope. The War Between the States was instigated over States’ rights for self-governance (in re slavery, primarily). If Mississippi were to pass a law legalizing slavery, would it be right or wrong to do so?

          • jr565

            So then when we are determining what is right, are we going by majority, or plurality? Is it based on an opinion poll? two opinion polls? referendums? The overall majority, versus the state majority? if the majority thought that gays should be sent to concentration camps and wear pink stars, you’d be ok with it?
            And why then if the majority of people support prop 8 would gays demand that it be overturned. The majority spoke.

          • Frogmouth

            Nice bit of reductio ad absurdum.

            Are you talking State level concentration camps or Federal? If State, how are courts to say that what people decide on the State level is wrong if it somehow restricts freedom for gays?

          • jr565

            Does it matter?

          • Frogmouth

            I was merely parroting your earlier argument, so you tell me why you were wrong.

          • jr565

            I wouldn’t be wrong. Right would be whatever I say it was. And if I didn’t like the standard being applied I could get the majority to change the standard so that I was still right.
            Why are we applying a democratic standard anyway? why not a standard where I take control and then kill all my enemies and run the country like a dictatorship.

          • Frogmouth

            So, when you say it, you’re right and when I make the same argument I’m wrong and if you’re wrong then you’d be right.

            I think this discussion has come to and end. I mean you’re more than welcome to think otherwise, but you’d be wrong.

            Again.

          • jr565

            But I’m not making the same argument as you.

          • grayjohn

            Like Obamacare?

          • jr565

            If prop 8 is passed in CA of all places, then how are you assuming that the majority want to change marriage? It seems like if the majority wants it to not be changed a court steps in and overturns the law.

          • Mohammed’s pink swastika

            Laws are not morality.

          • DixieAngel_76

            No, rape and murder was NOT ‘codified’ in the Old Testament.

          • maggie

            it’s interesting that this frog person does not believe in our God but doesn’t mind using the Bible in an incorrect and twisted manner in an attempt to refute his argument(s)

          • Mohammed’s pink swastika

            You have obviously never read the Old Testament.

          • Frogmouth

            Deuteronomy 13:13-19
            Deuteronomy 20:10-14
            Deuteronomy 22:23-24
            Deuteronomy 22:28-29
            Exodus 21:7-11
            Exodus 22:17
            Leviticus 20:9, 20:10, 20:13, 20:15, 20:27 21:9

            There’s lots more, but I think I made my point.

          • jr565

            So there’s really nothing wrong with murdering your mother. Its just that a bunch of people are saying its wrong. Are they right, though? How are they righter than the person who wants to murder your mother?

          • Frogmouth

            I can’t tell if you’re being disingenuous, or if you really are having that hard a time following logic.

          • jr565

            I’m just following your line of reasoning. Free will gives me the right to engage in any behavior I choose. The behavior I choose is to murder you and your family. (Hypothetically of course) how are you arguing that its wrong. How is society right to Impose its societal construct on me? And is that construct not based on an absolute morality or is it just a majority or plurality of people telling me what their opinion of how I should act is.

          • Frogmouth

            Free will gives you the right to engage in your hypothetical behavior. It does not relieve you of any consequences.

            Society has deemed murder to be morally (and legally) wrong.

            Tell me: On what absolute morality do you propose we base our societal morality?

          • jr565

            I would hope that society found murder to be wrong because it was objectively wrong and not because it was simply their opinion that it was wrong. Especially if it was going to punish people and deprive them of liberty if they were to commit a crime and violate the law.

          • Frogmouth

            Well, you can hope all you want but history would prove that hope to be false.

          • jr565

            So, do you think we should punish murderers? why? On what authority are you saying murder is wrong?

          • jr565

            Yes, if there were no society we could do what we wanted. Let’s say society ended, and it was just a handful of people left. And someone was about to beat your head in with a rock. On what grounds would you say he was wrong to do it? Is it just that you personally don’t want to have your brains beaten in, or is there something above both of you saying its wrong? Otherwise, might will always make right. No?
            How then are we judging the nazis to be wrong. They murdered millions but so what?

          • Frogmouth

            In a way, yes.

            The majority wishes a law to be made, so it is made. See 18th Amendment. If enough people wish a law to be repealed, it will be. See 21st Amendment. Their might is more than the might of the minority that does not wish it were so.

          • jr565

            We’re not a democracy. We’re a republic. So, you’re saying that minorities have no rights.thats good to know. So, why are you expecting gays, who are a minority, to have equal marriage rights?

          • Frogmouth

            A DEMOCRATIC Republic.

            We elect representatives who (theoretically, at least) share our own beliefs. If enough people petition those representatives to enact the 18th Amendment, it becomes illegal to do something that was once perfectly legal.

            How do you think Anheuser-Busch, Pabst, Miller, Jack Daniels, Jim Beam et al and all their employees felt about that? Were they not in the minority?

          • mike_in_kosovo

            A DEMOCRATIC Republic

            Actually, it’s a REPRESENTATIVE Republic.

          • Frogmouth

            And who elcts those representatives? The populace, by democratic vote, ergo Democratic Republic.

          • jr565

            Those same representatives passed laws saying things like gay marriage and polygamy are illegal. Now, could they turn around and make gay marriage legal? sure. But there is no obligation to.
            If they don’t, then there is no standard,except an objective one based on some degree of fairness or equality that gays will fall back on, to demand that gays be given those rights. Well, how is that standard objective? All I’m hearing is that you personally think gays should have the right to marry. Well so what?

          • mike_in_kosovo

            Nope, sorry. Go back and take a 6th grade gov’t class. Representative Republic ≠ Democratic Republic.

            You want to play word games with everyone else, expect to be held to the same standard.

          • Frogmouth

            So your assertion is that we DO NOT democratically elect our representatives?

          • mike_in_kosovo

            Never said that. Try another strawman.

          • Frogmouth

            Explain it to me. I’m willing to learn the difference.

          • mike_in_kosovo
          • Frogmouth

            Appeal to Authority. I could cite opinions that echo my position. but it would prove exactly the same thing as you. Nothing.

            In a democracy (one person one vote), the majority imposes its will upon the minority. The minority always loses.

            In a republic, the minority are (theoretically, anyway) represented by those elected to serve the common good. But as the representatives are chosen via a democratic one person one vote process, the majority still tends to come out on top.

            This country is a Democratic Republic. .

          • mike_in_kosovo

            So much for being ‘willing to learn’.

            You’re still incorrect. It has nothing to do with the elections but in how the government governs.

          • Frogmouth

            Not at all. I’m willing to learn, but I want YOU to tell me why I’m wrong.

            I summed up my point in two short paragraphs, comprised of only four sentences total. Can you explain to my why we are NOT a Democratic Republic as I described?

          • mike_in_kosovo

            I summed it up in the last sentence of my reply. Thanks for showing that you didn’t actually read the page.

          • Frogmouth

            Hey, I’ll come right out and state unequivocally I DID NOT READ THE WEBPAGE YOU CITED.

            I want YOU to tell me what you know and tell me why I’m wrong.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            Hey, I’ll come right out and state unequivocally I DID NOT READ THE WEBPAGE YOU CITED.

            That was apparent when you came back with the same incorrect argument.

            I want YOU to tell me what you know and tell me why I’m wrong.

            Already have. Like I said…so much for ‘willing to learn’.

          • Frogmouth

            No, you haven’t.
            You started out with “Nope, sorry. Go back and take a 6th grade gov’t class. Representative Republic ≠ Democratic Republic.”
            When asked to explain you tried an appeal to authority.
            When I called you on it, you reverted to “You’re still incorrect. It has nothing to do with the elections but in how the government governs.”
            And since then it’s been more of the same. At no point did you state a compelling argument why my position is wrong.
            Note: saying “You’re wrong.” is not presenting an argument.
            What’s next? “I’m rubber, you’re glue”?

          • mike_in_kosovo

            When asked to explain you tried an appeal to authority.

            Incorrect. Had you *actually* been ‘willing to learn’ and read the page, you’d know that. You’d also know why your summation was incorrect.

            When I called you on it, you reverted to “You’re still incorrect. It has nothing to do with the elections but in how the government governs.”

            Said statement still stands.

            And since then it’s been more of the same. At no point did you state a compelling argument why my position is wrong.

            Actually, I have – all you had to do was actually *READ* and (more importantly) *COMPREHEND* that last sentence quoted (or read the linked page).

            What’s next? “I’m rubber, you’re glue”?

            No, next is “If you’re going to say you’re ‘willing to learn’, then put forth the modicum of effort to actually friggin *READ* the linked page. Or, if you’re too damn lazy to do that, then try the last sentence that you quoted. If you *STILL* can’t figure it out from that, then I refer you back the first sentence.”

          • Frogmouth

            Sending me to the page is an appeal to authority. You can’t make your argument on your own, so you expect me to accept the opinion of a third party.

            So, please…explain to me how it is not a Democratic Republic.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            Sending me to the page is an appeal to authority. You can’t make your argument on your own, so you expect me to accept the opinion of a third party.

            Argument from authority (Argumentum ab auctoritate), also authoritative argument and appeal to authority, is a common logical fallacy.[1]

            In informal reasoning, appeal to authority is a valid form of argument, used to establish a statistical syllogism.[2] The appeal to authority relies on an argument of the form

            The consensus of experts on a particular topic is usually correct
            The consensus of experts support PP is probably correct

            Looks as if you have the same grasp of logic as you do gov’t – that is to say, none at all.

            Why should I re-write an excellent explanation because you’re too lazy to click a link?

            So, please…explain to me how it is not a Democratic Republic.

            I already have, three times, in a *very* oversimplified form.

            If you still can’t (or refuse to) grasp the difference between how an election is managed and how a government governs, then there’s really nothing more for me to say (and you should, in fact, go audit that 6th grade gov’t class).

          • Frogmouth

            So you use an appeal to authority to justify your appeal to authority. I guess I should have expected that.

            But you are right about one thing. Saying I’m incorrect is a very simplified form of explaining why I’m incorrect.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            So you use an appeal to authority to justify your appeal to authority. I guess I should have expected that.

            Good lord…. you lick windows in your spare time, don’t you?

          • Frogmouth

            Actually I’m quite surprised it took you this long to resort to ad hominem.

          • mike_in_kosovo

            I’m quite surprised you know the term. Of course, you’re using *that* incorrectly, as well (why am I *not* surprised?).

            I’m not saying your argument is invalid because you’re an idiot…. I’m just saying you’re an idiot. That’s not an ad hominem, just a simple statement of fact.

          • jr565

            So if I can get 6 out of 10 people to agree that murdering you is right, I can do it. There is nothing inherently wrong with me doing it though.

          • Frogmouth

            You can do it without backup. Free will, remember?

            And if those other nine are the only other nine people on the planet besides you and me, and they say “KILL HIM!” then I’m dead meat.

          • jr565

            I recognize that you would die. I’m just wondering why I should care if it were to happen. Like, if I see a gang of people murdering you should I call the cops? If I think murder were objectively wrong, then it would be a problem with them murdering you. But if not, then its like watching the nature channel when the hyenas eat the dead carcass. And if that’s the case, then isn’t it better to be the gang of murderers than the guy getting killed? It sounds like you’re making a moral case for nazism. I, as a moral human being can make plenty of moral arguments (based on absolute morality) about the EVILNESS of nazism. But if I were to take a utilitarian approach, then the final solution would be a model of efficiency.

          • Frogmouth

            If that’s how it sounds to you, then I apologize.

          • jr565

            I don’t see why anyone would ever trust you for anything. Since you have no sense of morality other than what’s coming out of your own head. If you thought you could get away with screwing me, I don’t see why you wouldn’t. The only consideration would be whether you thought you could get away with it. And even if you didn’t think that way, there’s no reason I shouldn’t assume you’re thinking that way. You have the morality of a sociopath.
            What are you teaching your kids?

          • jr565

            God said we have free will, but he also said there is right and wrong. Knowing that we can choose to not do right, despite knowing what we are doing is wrong. God allows us to make the evil choice. But that doesn’t make evil subjective.

          • jr565

            So, would you judge someone for committing war crimes in the middle of a war? that seems to be a break down of civil society and akin to being in a state of nature. Shouldn’t anything go? Why does the left, and more especially the left saying there is no god, judge what people do in times of war?

            The left called soldiers in Vietnam baby killers. Absent god, my question is, so what? In fact, all the pacifists used Christian arguments against war to buttress their case. Thou shalt not kill. How could they possibly even beleive this if they are saying there is no Objective morality?

          • Freddy Neat Shee

            I can’t pretend to know how best to run our society, as it is very complex. However, I could tell you how one of the people who helped write the constitution said:

            “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” — John Adams

            In other words, the laws that are put in place presuppose that people are restricting their own actions by a second moral code. In this case, it would be the moral code that was shared by everyone that wrote the Constitution, and voted, fought, and died for it.

            Note that most strains of evangelical christianity had not yet even been invented at this time (you’ll find a lot of them around the late 1800’s, though), but “common decency” is defined as the beliefs held by those who were most like they were. And they knew that to change the people to be less than they were, would necessarily change the country to the point where it was not manageable — where, for example, the question of whether or not two men can and should get married and adopt children, would not have even made it to be seriously considered — even homosexuals of the time didn’t want that.

          • Frogmouth

            And you know what homosexuals wanted in the 1800s…how, exactly?

          • jr565

            Was there a call for gay marriage in the 1800‘s?

          • Frogmouth

            Probably not, considering homosexuality was a crime punishable by imprisonment and even execution (although the latter was rarely enforced) until the mid-1800s.

          • DixieAngel_76

            Where in the Old Testament does it say it’s ok to rape and murder your mother?

          • Frogmouth

            Not sure about the whole “raping and murdering your mother” bit, and I don’t recall making that argument myself but the OT has instructions on waging war, killing the survivors and taking the women, children and livestock as spoils. The punishment for rapists AND their victims, punishment for homosexuals, witches and more. The buying and selling and treatment of slaves.

            Deuteronomy and Leviticus are good places to start.

          • Freddy Neat Shee

            … or your Koran :-)

          • Frogmouth

            Yes. The Koran is equally full of despicable things.

          • Mohammed’s pink swastika

            And then when you’re done, read the new testament.

      • jr565

        If that’s the case, there’s nothing really wrong with denying gay people rights, correct? since the idea of tolerance would similarly be a societal construct. And society could therefore construct any morality it wanted. Is bashing gays actually wrong, or are gays just saying its wrong because they are appealing to some non existent moral code?
        Careful what you are asking for.

      • jr565

        You sound like Ted Bundy –
        “Then I learned that all moral judgments are ‘value judgments,’ that all value judgments are subjective [it just depends on how you think about them], and that none can be proved to be either ‘right’ or ‘wrong’…

        …I discovered that to become truly free, truly unfettered, I had to become truly uninhibited. And I quickly discovered that the greatest obstacle to my freedom, the greatest block and limitation to it, consists in the insupportable “value judgment that I was bound to respect the rights of others. I asked myself, who were these ‘others?’ Other human beings with human rights? Why is it more wrong to kill a human animal than any other animal, a pig or a sheep or a steer? Is your life more to you than a hog’s life to a hog? Why should I be willing to sacrifice my pleasure more for the one than for the other? Surely, you would not, in this age of scientific enlightenment, declare that God or nature has marked some pleasures as ‘moral’ or ‘good’ and others as ‘immoral’ or ‘bad’?

        In any case, let me assure you, my dear young lady, that there is absolutely no comparison between the pleasure I might take in eating ham and the pleasure I anticipate in raping and murdering you. That is the honest conclusion to which my education has led me – after the most conscientious examination of my spontaneous and uninhibited self.”

        So are you, in your spare time out killing women like Ted? Can you find anything actually immoral about Ted’s killing of women that you could point to other than your personal opinion that killing women is wrong?

      • bill

        LOL–What?? So if there is no God and because he didn’t give us free will, where did the free will come from? U R one CONFUSED individual!!

        • Frogmouth

          Because god does not exist, he could not, logically, give us anything. That doesn’t mean we don’t have it.

          • jr565

            So, are you a good person? how are you judging that? how are the rest of us judging that? And free will to do what? How are you judging when you do something wrong, or when other people are doing things wrong. Or right. What standard are you applying to your moral choices? What standard are you applying to other people’s moral choices? And what standard should we apply to yours?

          • Frogmouth

            You may feel free (that pesky free will again!) to apply any standards you choose to judge my morality.

            Which you obviously already do.

          • bill

            According to your logic that’s true. However that doesn’t explain your own existence. Or is there no reason to explain anything at all. Just accept everything as is ? By doing so, eliminates the process of reasoning and the existence of reality. ,

          • Frogmouth

            So, if god didn’t make it there is no reality. There is reality, therefore, god.

            Circular logic.

      • Emma Brown

        YOU may choose to do it, but NO ONE should try to force others to do/think what YOU choose to do/believe…(like make a cake for same-sex “marriages”) if THEY do not believe in it!

        • Frogmouth

          I agree.

          But that assumes we allow same-sex marriages.

      • mhojai

        so if there’s n “morally wrong” why should he lose his job because he disagrees with minority perversion?

        • Frogmouth

          Well, that’s non sequitur, but okay…I’ll play along.

          There “is” morally wrong. I never said otherwise, only that morals are societal in nature.

          Eich didn’t lose his job because of a morality issue. He was forced out because the company he worked for are a bunch of spineless weasels. And stupid, too.

          The gay mafia tried the same thing with Chick-fil-A a while back. They stuck to their guns and sales went UP. Mozilla’s board of directors are morons. And hypocrites.

      • firefly

        I have but 2 things to say there is a God where you think so or not !!!!! and God say It’s an abomination in his eyes to be gay . He created man and woman . Adam and Eva as one not Steve and Earl and I agree with Orpheus 75 I just repeated what God said and if you don’t like it take it
        up with Jesus

      • Mohammed’s pink swastika

        There would be no morality without the Bible. The very idea of morals comes from the Scriptures. Not from society which has always been inherently sinful and evil.
        Where do you think your sense of morality comes from? Certainly not from your good intentions.
        Any since of morality that you think you may have, come directly from the Ten Commandments and the laws of morality put down in the Old and New Testament.

        Your societal constructs are due to an intellectual immorality. Your hatred of God is what drives your worldview, as well your opinion that man created laws of morality rather than God.

        It is a false construct, created to support your opinions on God

        • Frogmouth

          No morality without the Bible. Huh. I’m not really sure you understand what “morality” means.

          You do realize the concept of morality predates the Bible, right?

          I don’t hate god. You can’t hate what does not exist.

    • Richo

      I hear the great burgeoning civilization of Uganda is making great strides on combatting “abominations”. I’ll help you pack, schnookums.

    • Ryan Johnson

      in the technical sense it is their right to do what they want, but not their right to avoid the consequences.

  • Richard J Sunkle

    Thank God Jonas Salk wasn’t caught supporting traditional marriage.

    Louis Pasteur

    Read more at: http://www.healthfiend.com/weeklytop/top-10-greatest-medical-discoveries-of-all-time/
    Copyright © HealthFiend
    Louis Pasteur

    Read more at: http://www.healthfiend.com/weeklytop/top-10-greatest-medical-discoveries-of-all-time/
    Copyright © HealthFiend
    Louis Pasteur

    Read more at: http://www.healthfiend.com/weeklytop/top-10-greatest-medical-discoveries-of-all-time/
    Copyright © HealthFiend

  • http://lordfoggybottom.com/ BlahBlah

    OKCupid lets gay users hide their profiles from straight people but not the other way around. When I asked about the whole equality thingy I was called… well you know.

    Again, I don’t care to use the feature, I just wonder why double standards.

    • NRPax

      Because “Shut up!”

      • TheCommenterz

        I see you have no argument but seek only to shout down those that differ. Nice.

        • Frogmouth

          Are you really that obtuse?

          • TheCommenterz

            No, I am acute. I see you have no argument either. Are you really that unprepared to discuss anything, but only to accuse me of being obtuse?

          • Frogmouth

            You’re right about one thing. I have no argument. Merely pointing out that maybe your sarcasm detector might need some fine tuning. Or replacement. Is it still under warranty?

          • TheCommenterz

            Sarcasm is at times difficult to detect, especially in text. Not knowing NRPax makes it nigh impossible to determine what he was trying to communicate other than, “Shut Up”.

          • NRPax

            I notice that you still have yet to comprehend that my remark was done in jest. Any reason for that?

          • TheCommenterz

            Yes.

        • NRPax

          You’re new here, so you probably did not notice that I was being sarcastic to her.

          • The Monster

            Not only that, but you used quotation marks to indicate it was something SOMEONE ELSE would say.

            In fact, you were neither “sarcastic” nor ironic (what most people mean when they say “sarcastic) since you weren’t saying it yourself but quoting.

          • Frogmouth

            Sarcasm. Yeah…that’ll help.

          • Thale Taxurfeet

            *clears throat*

            And I quote,”Why can’t you say something beautiful and righteous for a change?”

            Oddball!

          • Frogmouth

            Woof! Woof! Woof!

            That’s my other dog impersonation.

          • Thale Taxurfeet

            Definitely an antisocial type…

          • Frogmouth

            Have a little faith, baby. Have a little faith.

        • The Monster

          You need to learn the purpose of quotation marks.

          • Ed McDowell

            The left loves to see us do this among ourselves. How about a do over you guys?

        • jr565

          Look up Klavan on the Culture. Andrew Klavan made a video about the lefty argument style called “because, shut up”. That’s how they argue.
          Why? Because, shut up. Its an attempt to shut down debate from the opposition.

      • Thale Taxurfeet

        And TOLERANCE! Now, SHUT UP!

        • NRPax

          Don’t forget “H8R!”

          To the person who had a comment in moderation that was answering my above post: I was being sarcastic in my answer to Blah^2.

          • Thale Taxurfeet

            This has been a test of the Sarcasm Alert System. Had this been an actual Sarcasm Emergency, your local LUF* Agent would have provided further instruction.

            * Lighten Up Francis!

          • NRPax

            Still may have to mobilize the LUF if his responses are any indication.

          • Thale Taxurfeet

            That’s a fact Jack!
            *Boom shaka laka, boom shaka laka*

          • NRPax

            Wonder how many people joined the Army hoping that it would be a bit like that?

          • Thale Taxurfeet

            I can’t imagine anyone could have thought such a thing. Even post Vietnam and Jimmy Carter.

            Of course 20 to 30 years ago, I could not imagine the modern Leftist aka Democrats.

          • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            (*cough* “SPC Ivan Lopez?” *cough*)
            What– too soon?

          • Thale Taxurfeet

            Too soon.

    • PeterTx52

      I deleted my OKCupid account due to their stance.

      • http://lordfoggybottom.com/ BlahBlah

        I hardly ever use it since they did away with journals. It was epic trolling.

        • ForTheRepublicOfDave

          Is it wrong to be in love with you? King Peter may not be pleased.

          Edit: Yeah, I went old-school with the Yugoslavian leadership.

          • http://lordfoggybottom.com/ BlahBlah

            I’m in love with you too! You had me at ‘chainsaw’. <3

            Look there were secret butthurt FB groups dedicated to several of us. And while I certainly don't count myself as the bestest troll, I gotta say I was high up on the list. Yes there was a list. There were actual people who spent a lot of days typing butthurt on FB.

            I never had FB and of course this was supposed to be a secret but somehow someone I knew got the secret handshake and got in. Then c/ped all things and sent to me. I then sent it around to everyone on the said list. The lulz were had for days.

    • Mike Peterson

      They actually dont care if put straight, they put people of your own gender in your matches regardless of what you put. I met the greatest person on there but i’m not supporting them at all, anymore. Not after this.

  • Perry

    “Tolerance” was only a 2-way street for Lefties when they were trying to get their agenda in the public and accepted. When they think that their way is accepted by more people than not, “tolerance” is shut down.

  • $9898556

    It’s “gaystapo”.

    • http://lordfoggybottom.com/ BlahBlah

      I’m stealing this. Will pay royalties in cookies.

      • http://twitter.com/newclasstraitor NewClassTraitor

        The term “gaystapo” was originally coined by Steve Colbert, in his satirical “conservative” persona. Unwittingly, he was a prophet.

        • Blake Waymire

          I don’t care who came up with the term, I use it in places other than the internet. It fits perfectly.

    • NRPax

      I also like “Al-Gayeda.”

      • Kimihiro Watanuki

        Now that’s a new one.

        • NRPax

          I can’t remember where I heard it but I liked it.

  • http://lordfoggybottom.com/ BlahBlah

    Also I wonder if Eich could sue. I hope he can.

    • M. Pittock

      Smells like reverse discrimination to me.

      • 46blitz

        why reverse? it’s plain discrimination.

        • M. Pittock

          That’s what it’s called when members of the majority are discriminated against. But, you’re right, it’s discrimination, pure and simple.

  • http://rueuhy.com/ Russthecurious

    2% seem to rule the world nowadays.

    • http://lordfoggybottom.com/ BlahBlah

      Hey as long as it isn’t 1%. 😀

      • Getserious!

        What’s ironic is the gay gestapo is in the 1%–Hollywood elites, media elites, and ever-changing (flip-flopping) government elite

      • Honu425

        I know it’s a little off topic, but does anyone realize that if you make minimum wage in this country, you are part of the 1%………of the world! I think it’s ironic.
        (Back to your regularly scheduled topic. Thanks.)

  • skypilot77

    I find there to be some irony in this whole episode. Brendan Eich makes a political contribution in support of traditional marriage. The anarchists are joyed they have punished and shut up Eich for this expression of his first amendment right.

    But during the same week — SCOTUS lifts the ban on accumulated political contributions which anyone can make. And we get the lame argument from the anarchists that political contributions from businesses are not an expression of free speech.

    What is it? Are contributions free speech or not?

    Does a person or business have a right to express that speech or not?

    Obvious rhetorical questions.

    The only expression which is free and allowed is the speech approved by the left wing gatekeepers.

    • http://twitter.com/newclasstraitor NewClassTraitor

      Precisely. Their vision is of a caste system where the New Class (a.k.a. neo-Brahmins) — and only they — tell the rest of us what to do and think. Their clients (which another has called “helots” and “dalit”) are mere electoral cannon fodder.

      • Freddy Neat Shee

        The constitution is pretty clear about not having “titles of nobility” — what we’re seeing here is the new-era “royals”.

        * Edited to remove the ambiguous term “queens”

    • CHHR

      Rhetorical or not, well said… Next up for SCOTUS… Freedom of association. Eventually we’ll be back to square one and redefining and/or clarifying the meaning of civil rights as outlined in the Constitution… If the constitution survives that long.

    • DLeeC

      CEO punished for something he did six years ago? Okay, wasn’t Obama anti-gay too around then, at least, publicly? He was for traditional marriage as I recall. That’s anti-Gay from a President. (Who is Reggie Love?)

      So now anyone who gave money for traditional marriage groups, aka MOST CHURCHES, while others are Social Justice churches and can’t dare say “God or Jesus,” in theirs, anti-abortion groups that “hate women,” gave funds to any military organization, are now going to be hunted down by the Gay Police?

      “Have you ever said the N-word?” “Were you ever anti-gay?”

      • Freddy Neat Shee

        What happens if, during the last 6 years, you happened to contribute to a church, which then contributed to Prop 8? Technically, you gave to Prop 8. This means that all Mormons and Catholics in California are perpetually barred from ever being a CEO of any prominent organization, which is exactly what Al-Gayda wants (love that term, BTW).

      • jr565

        Andrew Sullivan said what happened was detestable, and Huffington post responded it wasn’t the left that brought down Eich. what REALLY did him in was that he also supported Patrick Buchanan and Ron Paul in the elections. And he supported Buchanan way back in 1992!
        So, it wasn’t just that he supported anti gay marriage legislation but that he supported extremist candidates. I didn’t vote for Ron Paul, nor would I, but I would never make the argument that people who voted for him should somehow be punished. If I dared make that argument against some some supporting an extremist lefty candidate, the left would accuse me of crimes against humanity.
        The gaystapo has no problem making the argument when it comes to republican candidates.

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/dear-andrew-sullivan-left_b_5088417.html

  • YesterdayzNewz

    When will we say “Enough Already!”
    Then again, we live in a nation where people can’t even adhere to the rules of the road, let alone the rules of normal society.
    We should put a tax on expression. That might stem the tides for awhile.

    • WisconsinPatriot

      Today works for me.Every time one of these attempts to squelch the true will of the people(within reason) like this mozilla stupidity, Hobby Lobby, Chick-fil-a, etc. The people need to do whatever they can to be heard. Make it a habit.

  • MSM

    Even they don’t always get their way. They tried to censure Duck Dynasty’s patriarch and failed badly. And boy, they’re still smarting over that though they deny it. Like the bullies they are they still can’t believe they didn’t get their way.

    Mozilla’s CEO was needed to remind them of their “power rush” and make them feel powerful because they could bully someone. If Mozilla had just stood it’s ground it would’ve been find. As most Mozilla users wouldn’t have cared. Just this very vocal group that likes to bully people.

    Duck Dynasty showed if you just say, “No” and stand you’re ground you can reveal how little of these groups power is real. But Mozilla is run by cowards.

  • alvin691

    Tammy is awesome

  • Thomas Dunlop

    Homosexuals are in a minority and yet demand so much attention. Be what you are and keep it private instead of shoving it in everyones face. NO one cares if you are homosexual or not. Ones sexual life should be private no matter what side you are on. Be proud of what you have achieved and how you treat others not what your sexual preference is.

  • nc ✓s & balances

    Thank you, Tammy.

    Now will someone explain to me again why Repubs have to avoid “the social issues” in upcoming elections? You mean we can’t even take a stand against THIS kind of reprehensible behavior? NO ONE can find a way to speak about it?

    • CHHR

      Correction… the PROGRESSIVE wing of the party is responsible for that nonsense. In fact all that rhetoric by those more “pragmatic” sorts within the party is what opened the door to all this BS from the left.
      Between Obama and his stance on foreign policy and the social left and their stance on domestic we now have a complete picture of what decline looks like. Obviously, this also proves the more “pragmatic and progressive” wing of the GOP is just fine with that direction.

    • Ethanery

      Not with the media as it stands. Remember that Huckabee’s comment about libido (in which he was saying that women were independent and strong) was completely twisted into the opposite of what he said? The GOP needs to focus on the economy, at least with that it’s slightly (just slightly) harder for the media to twist our words.

      • nc ✓s & balances

        Well, let’s just give up then. They won.

        That’s what it sounds like you said. I hope not.

        • Ethanery

          Not give up, just focus on the economy. Social issues (with the way they’ll be twisted) won’t catch the swing voters, but people can be united against the harmful policies of the ACA (even if the media spins it, individuals who have been harmed know better). The GOP needs to also have a positive message, not just that the ACA is bad. We can win with those kinds of messages.

          • frgough

            Right. Because the media won’t twist your positions on the economy to starving the poor. News flash for you: the media will beat up conservatives on ANY position. So, bypass them. Buy air time and do informercials.

          • Ethanery

            I said it’s slightly harder for them to twist economic facts. And many of the people that the ACA has harmed know the true cause of their hardships, and hopefully vote to right what has been wronged. You’re right, though, we do need to get to voters through methods other than the mainstream media, we need to get more people checking out sources other than liberal news feeds.

      • CHHR

        beg to differ that image of “Ryan” pushing grandma over the cliff resonated…

        Frankly, you can’t separate one from the other. To reiterate what I’ve been saying, this is all about civil rights and if we’re so reticent to speak of how this all plays into the other now, we lose the opportunity to define ourselves as an equitable, morally based society that highlights freedom as a means of prosperity. I reposted what I said last night because, in the end, this is all about one’s right to be a part of the economic solution.

        Today, the issue is in the degradation of the word marriage from a purely spiritual union to something that brutally aims to destroy our Christian founding. Nevertheless, this push now to excoriate those that hold different opinions by even having them removed from their professional positions is a bridge too far and it’s time the BS ended. When granting one rights intrinsically harms another in such a manner, then you haven’t extended those rights to the population, you’ve become a thug that arrogantly determines who gets and doesn’t get those rights.

        • Perry

          You cannot separate the two. Social issues clash with financial issues. “I want society to pay for my abortions and/or birth control. I want to get pregnant at 15 and have society pay for my housing, food, healthcare, etc. and all the needs of my children up to and including incarceration. If you don’t want to do so, then you are denying me those things. Bigot.”

          • CHHR

            Everything you showed as examples are “entitlements” and there is a huge difference between equality and entitlement. The very definition of a nation that grants the freedom to be equal does not entitle one over another.

          • Perry

            I would say Conservatives need to do a better job of explaining freedom, and that just because they don’t believe the taxpayers should pay for this or that, that doesn’t mean they don’t want them to have those things. Difficult to do when the MSM tries to distort their positions. Hopefully the new media will correct that.

          • plumberskid

            It doesn’t matter what a conservative says, there will always be a loud, obnoxious and less than honest liberal to twist our words and distort the meanings behind them. That being said, there is no reason for us to just sit down and shut up. The more we talk, the more they will lie, to the point that even the lowest of the uninformed voters out there will be able to recognize the left for what they are. And we need to keep calling them out for each and every lie they tell.

          • trixiewoobeans

            I agree, but the media has stopped reporting the truth and is in collusion with the Left.

        • Ethanery

          Many swing-voters who have been harmed by the ACA should tend Republican come next election, while many Democrats (who have been adversely affected) will be disheartened, giving the GOP a more level playing-field.

          Even if you can’t fully separate them, focus on one more than the other. We need to have the numbers to change it, first.

          You do make great points, though, no dispute from me there.

          • CHHR

            all good except for one little bitty problem… we’ve tried this before and came across as rich white people who don’t “care.” Remember, the left is using every opportunity to usurp an economic message with social issues designed to hide economic issues. Instead of hiding from that fact by not responding, we need a message that resonates the meaningful and intricate relationship of both so that we can take back the narrative.

          • Ethanery

            You’re right, and the best way to resonate with voters is through a positive economic policy. Repeal of the ACA should help with some voters, and we can get others if we constantly push positive, and specific, policies.

          • nc ✓s & balances

            I’m with you on the “numbers” issue. NOTHING is more important than getting control away from the Dems, even if it means into the hands of the RINOs for now. Desperate times, etc.

            But I still believe that most people in America know that these “gaystopo” tactics are despicable. We need more ARTICULATE exposure of it before it gets more and more out of control.

            When young people see this kind of thing being “normalized” they accept it. This is the the goal, and one reason things are happening so fast. We can’t wait to push back, we have to do it NOW.

          • nickdqwk

            Progressive normalization of the children is part and parcel the goal of common core as it is being utilized in our schools.

          • nc ✓s & balances

            Actually, I would like to edit the beginning of my middle paragraph above to read:

            But I still believe that most people in America *would* know that these ‘gaystopo’ tactics are despicable *if they were informed about them in an honest way.*

            (My device would not allow me to edit the actual post. Sorry.)

          • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

            “If only the Czar knew…” he still wouldn’t/couldn’t do jack$#!t. “If [only] they were informed about them in an honest way[]”, but they won’t be. And not much anyone can do about it, or do about the gaystapo tactics either, unless they get up off their asses (which too many are loath to do.) The “Bulworth” moment is about to happen, where the corporations allowing themselves to be cowed, and the groups and media doing the hectoring, will simply admit “We do it, because we know nobody will do anything to stop us– we take your business for granted, and you don’t do anything to prove otherwise.”

          • Ruth

            Hi, nc. I know you beat the drum about not electing Dems even if it means voting for RINOs. I didn’t know if you saw this article but thought you would be interested. I’m going to send it to anyone who says they refuse to vote for anyone who is not conservative enough. Cheers.
            http://www.nationalreview.com/article/374528/which-side-are-you-kevin-d-williamson

          • nc ✓s & balances

            Ruth, thank you so much for posting this, it was so good I sent it to myself for future reference. It’s true, I do “beat the drum” a lot on this issue, but I do it because I see too many good conservatives seeming to say they are “done” with voting if they can’t get candidates that are conservative enough.

            Here’s just one quote I pulled from this Kevin Williamson piece: “I’d rather be disappointed by Republicans who periodically fail live up to their principles than have my country pillaged and hobbled by Democrats who consistently live up to theirs.”

            Remember also, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is about to retire.

          • Ruth

            Absolutely right and we need more drum beating. What a lot of conservatives don’t seem to realize is how long the fascists worked to take over the Democrat party; it wasn’t an overnight happening. And for conservatives to take back the GOP will be a long slog, too. But we can’t do it if people throw up their hands and refuse to vote. If the Democrats keep power, we won’t have a country left to save.

            Keep up the good work.

            P. S. He’s still a little cutie (Edit: oops, make that She)

          • nc ✓s & balances

            Thanks so much, Ruth. You are absolutely right about everything you said and state it well. There are different people reading Twitchy comments on different threads all the time, so we should keep it up to encourage people who might be unsure which way to go.

            Right except for one thing. My little chihuahua, like me, is a “she.” And although she’s all grown up now (2 years old and a full 6 pounds!), she’s still just as cute as she was at 2 months and 2 pounds in this picture. She thanks you!

          • Ruth

            Sorry about that. I don’t know why I didn’t remember she’s a she. We had talked about her before because I was missing my little 2 pound poodle.

            Anyway, we’ll keep talking about voting and maybe other people will, too. Here’s to November.

          • Ethanery

            We should push back against these tactics, I agree wholeheartedly. We cannot accept such vile and aggressive behavior. That being said, we shouldn’t place more emphasis on gay marriage than the economy (I know plenty of conservatives who believe differently, but frankly that issue pales in comparison to the economy).

        • Freddy Neat Shee

          And who was actually pushed off the cliff? Cancer patients who lost their coverage under Osamacare. So rather than a caricature of someone who doesn’t really exist, maybe a few pictures and video clips of real human beings who lost their coverage, or possibly their lives, due to Osama, may help.

          • CHHR

            Yes, it does help. In fact, so much so that the left has initiated hate filled email to those that dared speak out and/or IRS audits. We need to support and stand by those with the courage.

    • http://www.honoratus.org/ Snod

      The GOP has been and is failing because they do not understand taking a stand on well defined Conservative core values is a winner with American voters. Most of the GOP might as well be in the Democratic Party!

      • Tom Winegar

        Jokers like Boehner are too worried about their careers, freebees on the taxpayers dime and tanning salons to risk all of that.

    • umgoblue80

      Repubs are too afraid as being “branded.” Of course the irony is that they are branded anyway, between their “War on people of color, gays, women, animals, people on Medicare, unemployed people, people with pulses, etc…” It’s a wonder a Republican candidate can actually win an election with today’s media. #dontbelievethehype

  • http://www.grouchyconservativepundits.org/ Rusty Bill

    Of course, the “gaystapo” refuse to realize that their tactics are alienating people who might otherwise have supported their position. Thuggery never works in the long run.

    • Tom Winegar

      The more aggressive they are the more they need gratification from heterosexuals and there are plenty of those cumaid drinkers to provide it.

    • MrSnuggles2k2

      This is no longer about tolerance or equality, this is purely about revenge and they will not stop until Christians are forced underground.

  • onesoldiersmom

    It’s only fitting that he continue his fundraising activities in the wake of this mass shooting. He jetted to Las Vegas while our US Ambassador and three other heroes fought for their lives and were slaughtered in #Benghazi.

    • Hey, That’s Pretty Good

      Nothing gets POTUS more geared up for rubbing elbows with rich elitist liberals then people dying.

  • http://twitter.com/newclasstraitor NewClassTraitor

    So now will Barack 0bama lose his job for holding the same view of traditional marriage (until he “evolved” under pressure from homosexual donors)? Of course not. Some animals (donkeys) are more equal than others.
    And of course it is an unfair comparison. Brendan Eich created Javascript. Barack the Blightbringer never worked at anything other than worming his way into the next job up.

    • Perry

      Nah. They knew he was lying.

    • Griswold

      Barry will never lose his gig, all in DC have had their respective spines ripped out and destroyed. One could play “basis for impeachment bingo” with the long list of Barry’s crimes starting with that “crap sandwich” known as Obamacare.

    • SuperLogic

      That’s cus Barack was black, so the lefties didn’t know which politically correct group trumped the other. He’s a black Democrat, but believed in traditional marriage, so that probably gave him a 2 to 1 edge. If he was a black Conservative traditionalist, that would have been 2 to 1 against him, and fair game to slam. Eich didn’t have a chance being a white traditionalist, he’s at the bottom of the barrel.

      • Freddy Neat Shee

        He’s also very much for the senseless slaughter of about 400,000 blacks a year in the US via abortion — and considering 2/3 of those are from Planned Parenthood, that’s about $106,560,000 a year that Planned Parenthood gets due to BO’s policies. So while gay marriage will definitely lead to fewer whites being born (whites are overrepresented in the gay population compared to the general population), his advocacy of abortion is by comparison, about 5,000 boxcars full of blacks per year, and it directly puts money in the coffers of Planned Parenthood — you know, to keep the gas on.

        • SuperLogic

          Which brings it full circle, as Planned Parenthood was one of Obamas major financial contributors. Greasing each others palms.

  • jtak101

    Welcome to the new America..where the abnormal is now the norm…I used to have no opinion on gay issues….they’ve forced me to change that. Equality and entitlement are two completely different things.

  • yewzernayme

    WWPD?

    What Would Putin Do?

    • Lou Bator

      Vlad rules. He would ride Obamama’s bicycle bare chested and without the damn helmet.

  • http://allynsalley211-2.blogspot.com Tina Seward

    I am sick and tired of being told that I have to be tolerant of everyone else’s views when there is absolutely no tolerance being given for mine. Apparently toleration is a one-way street with certain people. Yet another reason that I fear our country is lost.

  • PursueJustice

    Time to uninstall mozilla software from all my computers.

    • Tom Winegar

      Just dumped mine along with all settings and files, I want to be sure they know at least one knows better than to share space with vomitypes.

    • Freddy Neat Shee

      I did that — didn’t take too long, and I have to say, after only a day of use, I’m very happy with Maxthon ( http://www.maxthon.com ) – it’s not mozilla-derived, and it’s very speedy. It’s support for en-gb is a little strange, but I’m getting over it :)

  • USUKBALLZCBS

    Uninstalled firefox this morning:)

    • Super Marsupial

      I’m tired of it freezing, what other would you suggest?

      • USUKBALLZCBS

        I switched to Explorer and Chrome (firefox has been freezing a lot)

    • nickdqwk

      What are you using now?

      • USUKBALLZCBS

        Mostly Explorer

  • RedKelly1957

    For all those out there against gay marriage and gays in general, maybe you should be pissed off at straight couples…they are the ones that keep having gay babies.

    • David Wilson

      We get it, you’re gay. We don’t care

    • Diggur

      Being against gay people is not the issue here. People’s first amendment rights are the issue. People don’t have to “hate” gay people to object to gay marriage. This is a sensitive subject for everyone, and we all need to be willing to try to understand the feelings of the opposite side. Forcing an agenda on people is not going to make them more sympathetic to a cause. You simply can’t legislate feelings or morality. If we are concerned about the rights of the gay community to follow their beliefs, then we also have to be concerned about the rights of the straight community to follow theirs.

    • LegalizeShemp

      At least until they identify the gene that causes this “congenital abnormality”, then most of them will likely be aborted. Do you think you’ll still be pro-abortion then, or will you screech about the “systematic slaughter of gay fetuses, that must end now!”. It’s always hilarious to watch you liberals get hung by your own rope.

    • viacell

      This is another twisted progressive brain. No need to explain further.

      • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

        Few things more SMH-worthy than an evangelical atheist.

    • http://www.freedomreconnection.com/ FreedomRecon

      Or here’s a thought….most people I know are NOT against same sex couples having the same benefits as married couples. In fact, they agree with it. What they disagree with is the word “marriage” when it comes to same sex. Marriage already has a definition, the union of a man and a woman under God, and you can not change the definition just because you don’t like it. Pick a different word, get the government to approve it. Then you have your union and your benefits, and this goes issue goes away.

    • tops116 ✓Quipper

      Thank you for acknowledging that you can’t refute Tammy.

    • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

      Well that’s a new low in idiotic “logic”.
      Let us know when you find people being flushed out of their jobs through information gained illegally from the government for supporting gay marriage. You see, some of us believe that marriage is by definition a man/woman partnership, we’re not out there trying to can people who don’t agree with us. It is our opinion, but we are not out there actively witch-hunting like the pro-gay marriage/liberal cause of the day crowd.

  • Super Marsupial

    Gaystapo in conjunction with the Ultra PC libturds soon to launch a program of sexuality re-assignment.

  • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    Sadly, this play on words is all too real: You’re for the Eichs, or for the Eichmanns, in this deal. There’s no middle ground. As long as what a person advocates is not criminal per se, that’s THEIR opinion, and you must live with it. Tell me the name of any crime, other than that of offending certain people’s sensibilities, Mr Eich has committed or advocated.

    Now, I fully realize this is private industry, and there is no Constitutional free speech protection guarantee. And I am not saying Mr Eich cannot be removed from his position. But I have the free speech right to condemn what was done, and so does every decent person who sees this enormity and decides that just sitting there and going along with it is no option, if this nation is to remain one in which we can voice our opinions openly and not have them squelched just because they might offend someone. Last I checked, there is no right not to be offended. If there were, I’d have had so many people in Court by now, they’d set a courtroom aside, just to hear MY cases.

    • CHHR

      ah, but there are legal protections for your free speech inside a corporation. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 identifies association to a group as protected… Eich donated his own money to a cause he believed in and therefore was illegally discharged for his association.

      • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

        Doubt it. Some states have such laws, which encompass political activism, but unless you’re prepared to say Eich got the heave-ho for religious belief, as opposed to political belief, you won’t even get in the court house door. Race, color, creed, national origin and sex are what it is impermissible to hire/fire based on in CRA 64.

        • CHHR

          While I doubt he will bring a suit against Mozilla, if he were to, his position is a position of strength. Religious beliefs are his position politically.

  • Legirons

    I had put Firefox on every device I own. FU Mozilla, it’s all coming off. Chrome is going on it all. I don’t care what the gay agenda says, a person has a right to an opinion unless it is contrary to the gay agenda and then they are demonized and ultimately fired. The guy has a right to disagree with gay marriage but not in gay land. The only right is the right to disagree with him otherwise they gang up and demonize you. Intolerance resides in the gay community.

  • Clancie

    Ms Bruce NAILED it…. if you want to see “intolerance”, “bigotry” and “hate speech”, look Left.

  • Hank_Scorpio

    My computers are all saying AMF to Mozilla. Good job, gay gestapo, you’ve become the fascists you supposedly abhor…

  • Arkuy The Great

    Firefox – produced by the politically monolithic Mozilla who is intolerant of thoughtcrime

    Chrome – produced by Google who sells your personal data to the highest bidder

    Internet Exploder – SRSLY, Guize?

    This almost means I have to give up the ‘nets (not necessarily a bad thing).

    • Lou Bator

      Agreed. I have been slowly getting off this internet crack and have gone back to gardening, bicycle riding and book reading. Much better for the soul.

    • Freddy Neat Shee

      maxthon is a pretty nice browser :)

  • sherry8260

    I went to http://download.com and found a couple of good free browsers to check out. There’s no way I’m supporting anything Nazi. They might just be monitoring its users and start banning us. I don’t want to log onto the ‘net some day and find out my browser doesn’t work and/or my info has been hacked and virused…

  • SuperLogic

    This whole tolerance issue reminds me of Fords advertisement many years ago, where they advertised that you could buy a car in any color you want, as long as the color you want is black. This is the mantra of the lib left progressives, where you can think and say anything you like, as long as what you think and say is what they tell you it is. This is the new definition of “tolerance”.

  • Flax Seed

    Before today I would have read this on Firefox.

    Today I read this on Chrome.

    Bonus: Chrome is faster than Firefox

    • World B. Free

      Chrome is also a GOOGLE product, they are too close to the Corruptocrats for my comfort.

  • Diggur

    Who will be the group that finally ends intolerance? Why don’t people understand that you can’t claim that one group discriminates, and then treat others in a discriminatory fashion? It will never end. I see it in all layers of our society – black people and white people blame each other for intolerance, gay people and straight people blame each other for intolerance, rich people and poor people blame each other for intolerance. Nobody is ever going to get it all their own way, so we had better learn to work together or we’re going to lose our country completely. And that will play right into the government’s hands. No matter what you believe in regard to the gay marriage debate, you also have to have the respect to allow free speech for others. No more Firefox for me.

  • Michael Doyle

    Firefox has been deleted from both of my computers and will stay gone unless this situation is corrected

  • TheBerean

    People basically have a sense of what is right and what is wrong. I was in a break room yesterday and was perhaps the only person in the group who is not a liberal democrat who voted for Obama. There was a television show on call “the View” and they were talking about the upcoming St. Patrick’s Day parade and the stance against turning it into a Gay Parade. The absolute look of disgust on the faces of all of these professing Liberal colleagues in this break room as the women on The View discussed the details of a Gay Parade was PRICELESS.

  • JJay278

    well I’m not using Mozilla anymore, anyone got any suggestions of a good browser? If not it’s back to IE. We need to show them what a boycott really is

    • V the K

      Here’s a bunch. Personally, I like Opera. But I’m gonna try Torch to see if it’s any good.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_browsers

      • JJay278

        Thanks :)

    • World B. Free

      Don’t torture yourself, iE is the worst.

      Well…. then again, Safari for windows PCs sucks even worse than IE, IMHO.

      • JJay278

        yeah on a PC Safari blows massive chunks

        • http://twitter.com/newclasstraitor NewClassTraitor

          Works just fine on Macs, of course :) It’s my main browser since it’s part of my OS anyway. I did set my search engine to DuckDuckGo…

  • World B. Free

    I have met Tammy Bruce. Wonderful person. <3 her.

    Too bad she's a lesbian. There, I said it.

  • Veritas177

    To the left it is no longer sufficient to agree, (I happen to support marriage equality) now you must sufficiently hate those who disagree. You are not merely a villain if you deviate from strict liberal dogma, you are a villain if you fail to concurrently hate any others not with the herd. Prop 8 supporters have been defined as “haters,” and as such, you must hate them in return, lest you be labeled a hater for insufficiently hating.

  • LegalizeShemp

    I see the SS (Sissy Stasi) is on the march again, bent on ridding the world of anyone who has moral or religious objections to homosexuality.

    • http://twitter.com/newclasstraitor NewClassTraitor

      Actually, I think the “gay” part is only a proxy. The real issue is “HOW DARE YOU support a cause that is not sanctioned by the Anointed”…

  • Lou Bator

    So, what is a good search engine to change to for “tolerant” people who are presently using Mozilla yet support Constitutional principals and abhor fascists?

  • Veritas177

    Kudos to Tammy Bruce. This is the most spot-on group of tweets I have ever seen in a Twitter feed. I am not a big fan of Twitter, but I can appreciate someone who uses their characters well.

  • World B. Free

    Oh, come on, moderators…. my comment went into moderation for using the “L” word? We’re all adults here, aren’t we?

  • Ted C

    Good for you Tammy for speaking out on this outrageous situation.

  • Nancy West White

    the more you tell me I have to conform the more i push back. The funny thing about it is I never was against gays in the first place

  • wineplz

    we should all be very afraid of the Thought Police if this sort of thing continues. What is going to stop ANY employers from firing ANYONE because of contributions to a political candidate or group that THEY disagree with????
    And for the record, I would just be as angry if it were the other way around (i.e. Mozilla fires someone for contributing to Anti-prop 8 group). This kind of crap effects ALL Americans.

    • Diggur

      Well said.

    • Onyx

      Nothing has ever stopped any employer from doing exactly what you describe.

      • wineplz

        Do you have links to back up your claims? Even if an employer did, the terminated employee would have very good grounds for a lawsuit, as does Mr. Eich.

        • Onyx

          You’re wrong. In general you have no legal leg to stand on. Lewis Maltby’s book, “Can They Do That?”, documents dozens of examples. You can be fired for a political bumper sticker on your car. You can be fired for smoking in your own home, or for skiing while on vacation.

  • PeterTx52

    too bad the MSM won’t report what Bruce tweeted or what Sullivan blogged

    • http://www.freedomreconnection.com/ FreedomRecon

      They may, but just like when it comes to race, these 2 are free thinking, and will be tarred and feathered by the left.

  • Orpheus75

    goodbye Mozilla.

  • sgosher

    Gay conservative?

    • http://www.freedomreconnection.com/ FreedomRecon

      There are lots of gay conservatives.

      • Diggur

        I have several gay friends, and only two of them are liberal. There are plenty of gay people who respect the rights of others and love their country. Assuming that everyone is the same is just another form of prejudice. The lady who is Twittering above is a great example of a gay person who respects others. Sorry, I just realized that I replied to the wrong person – I meant to reply to sgosher.

        • jaydee007

          And don’t forget, she was FORCED out of her Position with NOW because she supported Anita Broderick back in the days of the Womanizer in Chief Clinton.

          • Diggur

            Really? I didn’t know that. I hadn’t heard of her before today. Thanks for telling me!

    • journogal

      What a tolerant question! There are a lot of them…just because they aren’t in your face or marching or protesting, doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

    • LegalizeShemp

      Ever heard of the Log Cabin Republicans? You’ve never heard of them because they happen to be gay but not Communists, unlike the gays you’re familiar with.

    • tops116 ✓Quipper

      Way to keep up.

      😐

  • Lou Bator

    So, what browser do the geeks suggest to replace Mozilla? Something that is not gayfascist. Chrome? Opera? Internet Explorer? Any browser that would like “tolerant” folks business? Efficient yet immune to the Thought Police?

    • TJ

      None of them are “clean”. All of them bow to the gayfascist and would in an second fire a top level member of the board if they are found to support traditional marriage and a gave the token sum of $1000 out of there 7 figure pay.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      I’d stick with Mozilla. Chrome kept crashing my Windows 7 computer.

    • in_awe

      Google is in bed with the progs and the Obama administration. Nuff said.

  • John Marston

    I’ll be deleting Firefox from all my computers. It has been my primary browser for many years – I’m done with them.

  • iconoclast

    Eich should have had the politically correct opinion of Dick Cheney (supporting gay marriage) than Barack Obama (opposing gay marriage).

    Isn’t this an example of doublespeak? Gay Gestapo is more accurate than you know!

  • http://www.dachia.com/ Dachia

    I support rights. Period. So, while I do not agree with his views, I’m completely disgusted by how out of control the intolerance in the other direction has gotten. That this guy would be forced to resign is appalling. And I have a handful of gay friends. Might be a lot more that I just don;t know about, because it’s none of my business and matters not to our relationships. And I really hope they are not looking at this as a victory… it is disgusting and shameful.

  • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

    Uh Tammy Bruce—if you’re actually intelligent, you would have realized that Brendan Eich chose to resign on his own…he was not forced to walk the plank. That alone should abrogate all claims of victimhood. Resigning and being terminated are not the same. I also tweeted Tammy Bruce to see if she’s intelligent enough to recognize the distinction.

    • jaydee007

      Are you really that Ignorant?
      Or are you just funnin’ us?

      • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

        Neither…I believe that Tammy Bruce really doesn’t understand that distinction. Resignation is always a choice. Remember Pigford?

        • ceili_dancer

          When you have the choice to resign or be fired which will you choose? There isn’t much of a choice there.

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            Fired every time. I stand up for my principles. But in the case of Brendan Eich—I don’t believe that anyone was in a position to fire him…which to me makes him look limp-wristed. If a company was actually threatening to block users of the Firefox browser for using a certain site, Eich should have named that site.

          • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

            Allowing them to fire you isn’t standing for your principles. It screws your own work record, and depending on what state you live in, there’s not a thing you can do to clear your name.

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            It is. If you’re fired, you may be able to sue…depending on your state. There have been successful lawsuits for termination just based on beliefs held off the job (provided you didn’t sign a contract to adhere to a specific set of beliefs when you were first hired).

            New York and California, however, are pretty good on defending freedom of religion if they are the sole grounds for firing. Right-to-work states (except North Dakota), however, tend to be not as easy.

          • Freddy Neat Shee

            do you really think that the same court system that overturned a majority vote, and allowed the records of those people that supported prop 8 to be unsealed, would be in his favor if he went to court to fight his termination? Seriously?

            More importantly, do you think HE thought he had a chance in facing that court system? If he resigns, he is going to get some sort of compensation package to leave (a golden parachute, which doesn’t make a lot of sense because gold is *REALLY* heavy, but I digress). If he is fired, he *may* win millions. Or he may get nothing.

            But if he sues the Non-Profit Mozilla foundation, who is he really suing? The people that fired him? Or the people that donate to the mozilla project? And who would his problem be with? Certainly not the people that donated to the non-profit mozilla project. Plus, he’d lose anyway in the court system so obviously stacked against him. And suing a former employer would give most other potential employers legitimate cause to not hire him (as opposed to the current cause, which is nothing like legitimate).

            tl;dr: He didn’t wait to get fired because he’s fundamentally a good person, he doesn’t want to punish the donors of the mozilla project, he knows he wouldn’t win in court (he would win in a fair trial, but not in the court system he finds himself in), and he can do just fine without mozilla.

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            Had he been fired—yes. The question is: who could have fired him?

          • H50 ✓RAT

            Its also an economic decision, (depending on your contract) if you retire, you can keep your benefits, if youre fired you dont.
            Maybe he needed his healthcare coverage now that open enrollment is closed.
            Theyve known about this for a while, I dont think the timing was accidental, just another no real choice pressure point.

        • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

          So apparently you’ve never worked at a job where it’s clear you aren’t wanted there for some personal/non-job-related reason. They won’t fire you, but they make life as miserable as they can until you finally decide to free yourself.

        • in_awe

          Cyanide or firing squad – your choice. That’s a choice? Really?

          “He committed suicide of his own free will.”

        • jaydee007

          So I guess Willie Horton never robbed a bank because the Tellers willingly gave the money to him, they had the choice not to even though he was pointing that gun at them.
          Ri-ight!

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            Apples and unicorns. There is evidence of that. There is not sufficient evidence that EIch is being truthful.

          • jaydee007

            Okay, you ARE that Ignorant!

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            I do stand corrected on the truthfulness; however, the gay movement is still awaiting its apology, because this appears to have resulted from a threatened employee mass resignation if Eich did not resign (i.e., he goes, or we go).

    • tops116 ✓Quipper

      I bet you also believe Obamacare’s a huge success, don’t ya?

      • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

        No….and what did I say that could have possibly led to that, zippy? You presume too much, but then again, I should expect that from poser conservatives like you who aren’t really.

        • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

          I think the comparison was intended to highlight your incredible gullibility.

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            Or, I am that skeptical because people have lied in the past. How do I know that this is not another Chicken Little case, given that the major pressure came from Mozilla’s own workforce (as I later found out)?

          • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

            If the major pressure came from Mozilla’s own workforce, then they are harboring a hostile work environment, and are begging for lawsuits.

          • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

            Or, maybe there is something completely unrelated to what everyone is speculating (i.e., key tech people were threatening to bold the company)…and that everyone is wrong.

  • LissaKay

    I wonder … is the Gaystapo going to be combing through the life histories of all executives of every company to make sure their opinions and thinking are in line with their agenda? What about CEOs who are of Muslim faith? Will their resignation be demanded if they don’t denounce their faith and get in line with this progressive group-think?

    • Hey, That’s Pretty Good

      Nah, Muslims get a free pass. Mostly because libs are terrified of offending them because they know the “Religion of Peace” label is nonsense.

      • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

        Silence! I kill you!

      • Perry

        They’re allies, both hate Christians and the U.S. Muslims have agreed not to kill the “gays” until AFTER the U.S. has fallen.

  • Mackie

    The courts have accommodated the LGBT community, but now the intolerant activists like GLAD want to become a part of the grievance and victim industry. There apparently is no exercise of freedom allowed under these activists.

    • drw

      They’re addicts. The entire country could suddenly decide to capitulate to their every demand and within a week they’d be bitchin’ about some new perceived inequality or slight. They’ve tasted celebrity and the false adulation of the progressive hypocrite and can never again be satisfied. Every triumph will necessitate further outcry because the unpublished goal now is to feed their ego.

  • LissaKay

    More important than his stepping down is how his enemies got the info – It was leaked by the IRS.

    “When this fact first came to light in 2012, after the Internal Revenue Service leaked a copy of the National Organization for Marriage’s 2008 tax return to a gay-advocacy group, Eich, who was then CTO of Mozilla, published a post on his personal blog stating that his donation was not motivated by any sort of animosity towards gays or lesbians…”

    Yep, the IRS, who will soon be working closely with your healthcare provider, is leaking damaging political information about people to their enemies.

    Welcome to the nightmare… http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/04/03/the-fascist-thugs-win-one-firefox-ceo-steps-down/

    • in_awe

      The prog fascists used donor rolls published on line to assault the freedom of CA supporters of Prop 8. Look what they did with gun registration lists in the Northeast a year or two ago. This is part of defunding the political right.

  • rsoski

    This sort of stuff is being pushed right out of the White House by the Chicago gay bar trolling PARASITE IN CHIEF. Alinskys rules….Destroy anyone who doesn’t conform to communism. Funny thing. Once this nation is full commie. Gays will be the first slaughtered just before the lib press.

  • Zathras11 @B5

    Twitchy: FIFY

    Gay “Conservative radio host Tammy Bruce gave Mozilla…”

  • AT

    “[S]houldn’t you now send a questionnaire to every employee to make sure they have the correct opinions?”

    Seriously. Why don’t they? Why don’t the militant liberal/activist crowd openly push for this in every business?

    Serious question to any lib trawling Twitchy. You’d be for that, correct?

    • in_awe

      They want the right to stay out of their bedroom, but we are supposed to let them rummage around through our thoughts and values so they can harass us and get us fired because we don’t conform to their agenda. Sick.

      • AT

        The term “double-standard” is lost on a leftist.

        Or they just don’t care.

  • AmericanLass

    Must be a fun place to work, stifling freedom of speech, afraid you will say the wrong thing. Next “thought police ” ?

    • in_awe

      Sad to say, it is pretty widespread in corporate America.

  • doriangrey11

    Tammy Bruce is amazing, and always has been.

    The Homosexual Communities Nazi Schutzstaffel strikes again.

  • Hey, That’s Pretty Good

    If anyone who has ever opposed gay marriage needs to be removed from their jobs as punishment for committing thought crimes, why is Barack Obama still President? Why is Hillary Clinton not banned from public office for supporting DOMA when her husband signed it into law?

    • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

      Well, “… ‘coz they didn’t really mean it, y’know, it was just a ploy to get elected…”, which is NEVER believed about George Wallace’s “Segregation today and tomorrow” pronouncements, where it’s well-known he cynically used the rhetoric to get elected, though his own actual personal beliefs weren’t nearly so “hateful,” because he determined “[he] wasn’t gonna be ‘out-“n*****ed” ‘ next time.”

      • Perry

        Yep. When he ran for Governor in the 80’s, Blacks voted for him.

  • tops116 ✓Quipper

    Ya just know Mozilla is eventually gonna sign a promotional deal with Alec “You c***-s***er!” Baldwin. “Sure he uses gay slurs, but it’s okay because he supports gay marriage… we think.”

    • LegalizeShemp

      Just don’t say it to a lesbian, that’s heresy.

  • John Bibb

    ***
    Tammy Bruce was mugged by reality a long time ago! She always calls ’em like she see’s ’em.
    ***
    Rocketman
    ***

  • LegalizeShemp

    No surprise, the Left lambasted the SCOTUS decision on freedom of speech concerning campaign contributions, so at least they’re consistent in their opposition to the 1st Amendment concerning any speech they disagree with.

  • LegalizeShemp

    The leftists are using the NSA, the IRS, government agencies, the media and the SS (Sissy Stasi), also known as the Rainbow Mafia, to find out who is contributing to conservative causes, so those donors can be harassed, intimidated and silenced. Better get a handle on this folks, this is getting very serious and very dangerous.

    • Hey, That’s Pretty Good

      How much do you want to bet if the shoe is on the other foot when Republicans eventually take over again the libs will suddenly actually care about rights?

      They don’t mind stomping over other people’s rights, but let them get a taste of their own fascist medicine and then they care about rights.

      • http://www.freedomreconnection.com/ FreedomRecon

        Exactly, I just made this argument on a different thread!

    • Karl Winrich

      Fascism in action.

    • in_awe

      Boy, they perfected that in the CA last decade. Protesters’ use of donor contribution reports led many people on the right to curtail their constitutionally guaranteed right to support candidates and causes they prefer. Their homes and places of work were boycotted, families harassed, etc.

      “First they came for the…” History is repeating itself – it is time to stand up to this fascism of the left.

  • http://yourdaddy.net/ NotaLemming

    Somehow Obama thinks separation of Church and State which is Nowhere in the Constitution is to protect the Sate from the Church.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQSzTATwtbQ

  • http://yourdaddy.net/ NotaLemming

    Obama Lied about his Gay Marriage evolution
    This timing was planned years in advance
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwhW_7SYeRg

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      Well, in 2000, Obama didn’t have to enforce the COTUS. When he had to, support for gay marriage had to go.

  • LegalizeShemp

    Hey liberals you need to modify your employment disclaimer. It now reads, “We do not discriminate based on age, gender, sexual orientation, religion or national origin.” It should read, “If you disagree with liberal doxy, or support anything or anybody who opposes liberal doxy, you will be FIRED immediately upon such discovery, regardless of your age, gender, sexual orientation, religion or national origin.”

    • in_awe

      Sounds about right. Diversity is to be celebrated!!! [Except if you are white, male, heterosexual, conservative, fiscally responsible, etc.] Forward!!!

  • kennyraisin

    Any hot lookin woman, lesbian or not, who likes to play with guns gets my vote.

  • LegalizeShemp

    What if a Muslim is hired as the new CEO of Mozilla? Will the liberals celebrate cultural diversity or fire him immediately for opposing gay marriage? Inquiring minds want to know.

    • gekkobear

      That actually is hard to say.

      In 2000 when Obama supported “Traditional Marriage” Black trumped gay.

      But now we must punish Uganda, so gay now trumps black.

      The winner changes every few days.

      I have an easier time sorting out the rules for Calvinball.

      • Lou Bator

        Calvinball rules! My ghost runner was safe.

    • Jake Bradford

      It keeps changing. Currently, gay trumps black and muslim…but soon Muslim will be #1 and the gays will be under the bus.

    • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

      If a Muslim ends up as CEO, chances are, he would have earned his position. As such, that’s a straw-man argument.

  • https://youtu.be/h82D5ZvcALM CrustyB

    I just blew FireFox off my work computer. I don’t support hijacking marriage to mean two men stretching out each others poopchutes until they need to wear Depends by the age of 40. I presume Opera has no such “you must support homosexuality” restrictions?

    • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

      “Marriage equality” just sounds so much prettier, doesn’t it?
      Although, I don’t care what they do in their bedrooms as long as they don’t drag me and my tax money into it. Demanding that people fully support your bedroom activities is just stupid.

      • http://www.freedomreconnection.com/ FreedomRecon

        They have become the party of race, gender, and sexual preference. As if any of this had anything to do with one’s character.

      • https://youtu.be/h82D5ZvcALM CrustyB

        People can do whatever sick things they want in the hell of their own bedroom. But when you reach over and seize something that belongs to me and my people…marriage…you’ve gone too far.

  • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

    Suppose any company found out through illegal means that someone contributed to the cause of legalizing gay marriage, then proceeded to drum them out of the company. It doesn’t matter what the belief is that is being persecuted-it’s the fact that they are able to push you out of a job because of your beliefs.

  • Asillem4

    Time to stop using FireFox as my browser. Back to Chrome for me (for now). This country is so flipping backwards. “TOLERATE ME OR I’LL BULLY YOU INTO AN UNEMPLOYMENT LINE, YOU INTOLERANT NAZI!” *sigh*

  • Yoma Ma

    Its just ridiculous- they did the same thing to Chik Fil A, and others. Look I might not agree with their point of view but to punish people for their political views is so hypocritical. Everyone has the right to their own opinion, that is what this country is about. I am not against gay marriage but I am against the persecution of others due to it.

  • Vision Rider

    At last a voice of sanity in the world. Thank you for you comments.

  • https://vimeo.com/super8shooter The Rising

    Christians and the like will soon be forced to hide their views in the closet or face massive persecution. All predicted, of course.

    • LegalizeShemp

      Yes, just like in Egypt

    • Perry

      Oh yeah, we knew all of this was coming. Gonna get much worse, but won’t last long.

  • Jay Stevens

    I remember 20 or so years ago when the said, “We do not want gay marriage. We just want equal rights.”

    This is also called “letting the camel get his nose into the tent”.

    • Lou Bator

      I remember 40 years ago when the coming new Ice Age was all the rage. So much for today’s global warming, or whatever it is called now.

    • Jake Bradford

      Here’s a tip: leftists, no matter how much they say so, NEVER, EVER want “equality”. What they want is their enemies punished & those who conform to their narrative rewarded.

  • Taco Boutit

    #BeBossy! Hell yeah!

  • gekkobear

    http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/04/04/dissents-of-the-day-63/

    “What if an employee went to a demonstration that his company found
    objectionable? Would that be a reason to fire him? What we have here is a
    social pressure to keep your beliefs deeply private for fear of
    retribution. We are enforcing another sort of closet on others. I can
    barely believe the fanaticism.”

    When I can quote Andrew Sullivan, and he 100% accurately and concisely sums up my view on a topic, either it’s opposite day, or someone screwed something up ROYALLY.

    • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

      Or else Andrew Sullivan has a bit of intellectual honesty and personal integrity. Sullivan claims he’s an “Oakeshott Conservative,” a person who might have what Conservatives would hardly claim to be conservative positions on issues, but he decries the lockstep thinking of the Left who say theirs is the ONLY way. In other words, he’s a gadfly to the Left who tell him, “You’re one of US, Sully, just admit it!” as he tells them, in effect, “Hell no– when you march, I’m staying right here and sitting on my bum rather than be seen with you idiots. Ta, lads.” He’s too independent for them (read, “ornery”).

    • Hamblerger

      He wasn’t fired. His presence in the role was affecting the company’s bottom line due to people not wanting to be associated with a product overseen by someone who actively contributed money to limit the rights of others, and he voluntarily resigned.

  • glossolalia

    Free market at work, both with social progressives uninstalling Firefox on learning of Mr. Eich’s contribution and then social status quo’ers uninstalling Firefox on learning of Mr. Eich’s resignation.

    Firefox will do what is best for its company. Can someone explain what’s the big fuss?

    • LegalizeShemp

      So you’re OK with people’s personal tax information being revealed to leftist groups by IRS auditors who are breaking the law in order to silence opposition to the radical homosexual left? Thanks Mr. Stalin !

      • Perry

        If he had been forced to resign for contributing to a “Pro Gay Marriage” group, the question, “Can someone explain what’s the big fuss?” would not have been asked.

        • glossolalia

          You raise a good question, Perry, and I would imagine the left would raise a pretty big ruckus over that! I’m not sure, however, that you’ve addressed my question, namely, “Why are we not letting the market decide?”

          • Perry

            There’s really not much else that can be done. Just like with the Chick-Fil-A “issue”.

            “Chick -fil-A is now $5 billion in sales, @ $3.2 million per store, vs. $4.22B for KFC @ $938K per store. Chick-fil-A has more than three times the sales per unit. And they are not open on Sundays!”

          • glossolalia

            See? You bring up the perfect example, and I agree with you! I have many friends who do not eat at Chick-fil-A and many who make a point to do so.

            In this instance, though, I’m not sure social status quo’ers have much recourse. IE, Chrome, Safari and even Opera are all produced by companies with socially progressive HR policies, like many global corporations.

            Thanks for the reply!

      • glossolalia

        Wait, I honestly might have missed the part where this info was released by IRS auditors, but I was under the impression that political donations >$200 were public record. If I’m wrong – and I may well be – please someone correct me.

        Also, why the name calling? I didn’t propose any of the things you suggested. Maybe this board wasn’t the best place to look for a debate.

        • LissaKay

          http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/04/03/the-fascist-thugs-win-one-firefox-ceo-steps-down/

          “The IRS abuse scandal started the process that got Eich ousted.

          Why, then, the ruckus? Amazingly enough, it is entirely due to the fact that Eich made a $1,000 donation to the campaign urging a ‘yes’ vote on California’s Proposition 8. When this fact first came to light in 2012, after the Internal Revenue Service leaked a copy of the National Organization for Marriage’s 2008 tax return to a gay-advocacy group, Eich, who was then CTO of Mozilla, published a post on his personal blog stating that his donation was not motivated by any sort of animosity towards gays or lesbians, and challenging those who did not believe this to cite any “incident where I displayed hatred, or ever treated someone less than respectfully because of group affinity or individual identity.”

          To whom did the IRS leak NOM’s files? The Human Rights Campaign.

          The HRC evidently engineered Eich’s ouster, in the name of equality and tolerance.

          The IRS actions create a serious chilling effect. Your donations to any group can be leaked by a hostile operative within the government, to your enemies, for use against you — up to and now including costing you your job.”

          • glossolalia

            This is an incorrect statement, LissaKay. The article in your link leads to an article on FirstThings that appears to have – at one point – stated it was an IRS leak, but they corrected their error:

            “This post originally wrongly claimed in error that Eich’s tax return became public after a leak from the Internal Revenue Service. We apologize for the error.”

            http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2014/04/mozilla-mo-problems

            I’m certainly glad that wasn’t the case – and I did check, just to make sure, and all political donations about $200 are a matter of public record in California. You had me worried for a second!

    • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

      Being run out of your job (strongly encouraged to quit) due to contributions you made to a political cause is not acceptable.
      Tolerance, people.

      • glossolalia

        What if his presence was hurting Mozilla’s bottom line? Should they be forced to retain him? No thanks. Let the market sort this one out.

        PS – I hope you condemned the AFA’s boycott of JC Penney just as strongly. After all, they tried to get Degeneres fired as spokeswoman.

        • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

          My thoughts on that were that if JCP chose her as a spokesperson, they knew that she wears her sexual orientation on her sleeve, and that will be reflected upon their brand. I thought that JCP should stay firm and say “You don’t get a vote in how we run our company.” They chose her, they can own it. I never specifically boycotted Penney’s. I don’t shop there because I can’t afford a $40.00 shirt & $70.00 jeans. I’m not too good to shop at Goodwill for 2nd hand merchandise.

      • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

        Eich was not forced out though. To claim that he was is lying.

  • http://www.PatriotOutlet.com/ SplendidIsolation

    “I guess the irony of it is, the world is trying to marginalize us, trying to shut us up. But this is how it flows. Reject the Bible, in a culture, we’ve done that, we’re there. That’s first, reject the Bible. Second, turn morality upside down. Fornication is good, sex is recreational, homosexuality is normal, homosexual marriage is acceptable, abortion is good, a woman’s right to choose, so you’ve rejected the Bible, now you’ve turned morality upside down, you’ve substituted good for bad, light for darkness, bitter for sweet, to borrow Isaiah 5’s words.

    Third; demand tolerance…demand that all of this morality be turned on its head, be tolerated, all of it. It has to be tolerated. We have trouble with that because we understand that immorality on any level, sex outside marriage between a man and a woman, is wrong. It’s sinful, it’s dishonoring and it’s destructive. And a lot of other issues of morality. But we’re going to be forced to be tolerant which then turns to intolerance.

    So first you reject the Bible. Then you turn morality upside down. Then you demand tolerance and then for the people who don’t provide that tolerance, you become intolerant so that the message of Christianity becomes hostile. And that leads to the final step which is persecution…persecution.”

    via John MacArthur
    http://www.gty.org/resources/sermons/TMC270/how-to-think-and-act-in-evil-days-part-1?term=evil

  • cardhuu

    Frog Mouth I’m sorry I missed saying happy fools day to you and your fellow atheist on Monday your nation holiday! Psalm 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good.

  • Freddy Neat Shee

    George Takei started a comment thread about Mozilla a couple days ago, and I saw a few interesting posts in there. One that stands out to me was one by a guy who posted about 6 paragraphs talking about all the things that the gaystapo has been doing to limit the rights of normal Americans (he mentioned the arizona cake baker thing, I think, and some others), along with a plea to people to just have a little common sense about this whole issue. He ended it with:

    “Stop the hate. Start with you.”

    That really resonated, in part because it left the gaystapo supporters apoplectic – they were confronted by their own hate, and the realization that they were displaying more hate than they were railing against — there was no sign that the new CEO of Mozilla was going to go fire all the people who voted against Prop 8. But that’s exactly what Al-Gayda was doing to him!

    • Edward Teach

      “Al-Gayda”…love it!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYRtmMxB5yw CrossWinds

    In its current state, tolerance has become the supreme
    virtue for the politically correct Gestapo. It has been redefined to affirm all
    sorts of immoral behavior. Everything is to be accepted, and to feel otherwise
    makes you – gasp! – judgmental. Americans are so afraid of being labeled as
    intolerant or judgmental, that we have warped into a society with few
    boundaries. The liberals and socialists are bent on destroying the ‘West’s’
    Judeao/Christian heritage and replacing it with the new ‘Doctrine of Political
    Correctness’.

    • Hamblerger

      So did you just randomly copy/paste bits and pieces of a Rush Limbaugh transcript, or did you come up with that all on your own?

      • john lecorchick

        just a shot in the dark … maybe his parents brought him up with their values… crazy, huh? (sarc)

        • Hamblerger

          So his parents read Republican talking points to him rather than Dr. Seuss, but never taught him how to use them in context?

  • Jake Bradford

    It’s going to get worse before it gets better. This kind of witch-hunt is going to spread.

  • Hotlanta Mike

    Uh oh: 60% of Intel employees who donated in Prop 8 debate supported banning gay marriage

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/04/uh-oh-60-of-intel-employees-who-donated-in-prop-8-debate-supported-banning-gay-marriage/

  • Richo

    Please do have fun dumping Firefox and choosing between pro-gay Google, Microsoft or Apple for your browser. Of course you could go Opera but since it is made by evil godless pro-sodomy socialist Norwegians it may be the worst of them all….. Ummm, Lynx anyone?

    • Perry

      Who have the alternatives “fired” for their views on “gay marriage”?

      • Hamblerger

        Nobody. Then again, Firefox also didn’t fire anyone. The CEO resigned. The better question is “Who on the boards of those companies donated money to anti-equality measures?”

      • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 aemoreira81

        Mozilla didn’t fire anyone either. Eich resigned. Before you say that he was fired…who was in a position to fire Eich? And was this the reason why Eich resigned, or was it something else?

    • Ms. Abigail van Beagle

      Is Lynx any relation to Linux?

  • Ryan Johnson

    I’ve read on the internet somewhere that on Chic-Fil-A appreciation day, one person was quoted from the Chic-Fil-A as saying “I’m tired of these gaystapo tactics.”

    The media is run by gays now, though. The owner of all of Gawker Media, in all of it’s open Christian bashing is gay.

  • Dennis the Dreamer

    It’s official the gay LGBT community are the new Gestapo.

  • DixieAngel_76

    And elsewhere in the news…… the administration fiddles while Amerika burns.

  • Larenzo1

    To hell with Mozilla and Firefox.

  • grayjohn

    Gay? Don’t care. Your personal life is your business and not mine. Bullies? I hate bullies, gay or straight, and I WILL fight back, no holds barred. The gay lobby are bullies. Pushing people around will not get you what you want, and will get your ass whipped.

  • http://rationalandright.blogspot.com/ The Rational Right

    Now we know why Prop 8 opponents filed suit to secure the names of those who donated money to Prop 8 supporters.

    • Mohammed’s pink swastika

      It’s like you’re trying to say something… Did you go to public school?

      • http://rationalandright.blogspot.com/ The Rational Right

        Prop 8 sought to restore the traditional definition of marriage in California state law. Homosexual rights advocates, opposed to Prop 8, file suit to secure the names of those who, like Brendan Eich, donated money in support of Prop 8, just so they could assemble with their pitchforks and torches to destroy them.

        There . . . a translation for the culturally uninformed.

  • polarfan

    Mozilla can go to HELL!

  • Sylvester_Web

    The socialists are a herd mentality. Being an individual with your own opinions or thoughts, amongst the herd, is a very serious threat to the herd.
    Being individuals in this country got most of us to where we are as a country and community. We are a threat to the socialist herd the world over, by our very existence. That’s why we have to be vilified, hated and disposed of in so many controls. Odd isn’t it, when a bountiful location is inhabited by those who seek to deprive the ones who created it, call the creators the threat. Well, yes, a threat to the freeloaders.
    Natural selection is a part of their life and death, as well as ours too. Who came up with the term “natural selection” before Darwin and the evolutionists view of the world? Socialists. They are experts at creating problems only they claim they can protect “us” from. I’ve witnessed their meddling in Europe, Africa, India and now here in the U.S. All it brings is dysfunction, destruction and unhappiness to those who believe in it. I refuse to believe or give up that I as an individual is a threat to my neighbors. I will not be silenced by the lowest common denominators.

  • Old CTIC

    Who can suggest a friendly browser other than yahoo (very Liberal) and Google (even more so)?

  • billetdoux

    I’m sick of my gay friends not defending the rights of straight people…why should we defend the rights of gays and only to have gays turn into the same vicious people we stood up against to protect our gay friends from. Never again..will I speak out to support any gay cause…

  • Jose Rodriguez

    If one claims that government should reduce discontent due to envy, one will also claim that the state must reduce the liberty which leads to unequal incomes and associated envy.

  • LtColO

    I’m just curious when Silicon Valley will get REAL righteous and start ousting all these Muslim engineers that are busting out code for them on the daily? I mean, that’s a faith that doesn’t tolerate ANY acceptance of the gay “lifestyle” whatsoever. So go for it! Be consistent! And don’t give me the dodge, “Well, being a CEO is one thing” because there are plenty of critical leadership roles below CEO that are held by Muslims. I want to see the gutsy Leftists really walk the talk.

    • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15458282944035344707 repsac3

      Maybe you should highlight one of those critical leaders and start a boycott…if that’s not too anti-free speech. (Or if it’s only anti-free speech when folks who disagree with you boycott.)

      Deciding which products and services you will and will not use is the very essence of free speech–even if you decide based on things that the CEO, board of directors, or “critical leaders within the company who are muslim” (or who are associated by their religion with actually-guilty others) have said or done.

      With very few exceptions, the “traditional marriage” people boycotting Mozilla this week are not behaving any differently than the “marriage equality” folks boycotting them last week, and neither group are fascists or opposing free speech by behaving as they are. Free speech means that the folks who disagree with you get to respond to what you say with speech of their own.