•  News
  • 50.25% (Neutral)
  • Member Topic Starter
The newly-appointed CEO of Mozilla, Brendan Eich, has decided to step down after a firestorm of criticism erupted when it was made known that he donated $1,000 to support Prop 8, which was a measure to ban same-[censored]marriage in California.

Mozilla Executive Chairwoman Mitchell Baker penned a blog post discussing Eich’s resignation, and her language certainly seems to indicate that Mozilla believes that it erred in promoting Eich in the first place as opposed to simply backing off because of public pressure. “Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it,” she wrote. “We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it’s because we haven’t stayed true to ourselves.”

Mozilla Brendan Eich
Now-former Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich

She also makes it clear that Eich made the decision on his own, “for Mozilla and our community”.

“While painful, the events of the last week show exactly why we need the web,” added Baker. “So all of us can engage freely in the tough conversations we need to make the world better.”

It remains unclear what will happen with Mozilla’s C-level leadership at the moment; Eich was the CTO before being promoted to CEO, and Mozilla has not revealed whether Eich will be plugged back in to the company in another capacity.

function eich()


alert("You should have thought that one through.");



This is sad. He should just move on anyway. Apparently that org is filled with people who are not tolerant of those who have different views than theirs.

The biggest bigot is the one who calls others bigots except themselves.


Hahaha intolerance of bigotry is worse than bigotry? No.

Also... having a different view of things is not the same thing as trying to fund legislation to have your bigoted views become law.

An example so that you might grasp the difference might be that I don't like lutefisk. I think lutefisk is icky and gross. It is not something I enjoy. If my dislike of lutefisk goes no further than me disliking lutefisk, there is no problem with that. However, if I actively work towards or fund an effort to ban lutefisk and deny anyone the right to eat it... then I'm no longer just having a different view... I'm trying to force my views on others, which would be wrong to do.

Do you understand now?


While I don't agree with his contribution to the attempt to ban gay marriage I don't think it has any effect over whether or not he can lead a company. I don't think that his anti gay marriage views would effect Mozilla but I can see that from a public view standpoint that he felt the need to step down after such backlash. Obviously people were upset so something needed to be done.


That's total BS. It seems as those with traditional values are the only folks who aren't allowed to voice, or even have, an opinion if it runs contrary to those groups who feel they are discriminated against.

The fact of the matter is that marriage was defined by the church as a union between a man and a woman many centuries ago. If the gay and [censored] community want some sort of legally recognized union, fine I have no objection, just don't ask the govt to redefine an institution established by the church. Also don't claim that we as, strait people, are discriminating against those that want same-[censored]"marriage" because there isn't any. People, in general, seem to have forgotten what discrimination truly is. Black people were truly, and really discriminated against as there were laws in place that treated them differently and unequal. However, marriage has always been between a man and a woman. Homosexuals have all the exact same rights as strait people do. For instance, I as a strait man am no more legally allowed to marry another man than a gay man is allowed to legally marry another man. A gay man has the exact same choice in marriage partner selection as I do as a strait man, just because the gay man isn't interested in marrying a woman doesn't mean that he is being discriminated against. Now if there were a law that allowed men to marry men so as long as both men are strait then we'd have discrimination.

I say if the gay and [censored] community want a legally recognized union with the same benefits as a marriage, I'm all for it, hell I'll even do everything I can to help further that cause. They need to stop trying to force the govt to redefine a church defined institution. Also stop falsely claiming discrimination, there is none.


Freedom of speech as long as you say what we want you to


The CEO has have a really tuff time with all this controversy and what im saying is that he should be allowed to speak and do what he wants I mean that's what is this country about right? hope whatever happens is for the best


Haha, nice.

For those who might not be aware, Brendan Eich wasn't just Mozilla's CEO, he was also the creator of JavaScript.


lol good. He should step down. No need for intolerance of any kind anymore. Its 2014 people... get a clue

Joel H

The government has not and will never force a church to hold a ceremony to recognize a couple. That's a straw man. You are not allowed unilateral rights to the word "marriage," simply because you think you ought to have them.

My preferred solution would have been for the IRS to declare all marriages as "Civil unions" for everyone, period, and let churches call a civil union between gay people anything they liked.

Finally, intolerance of intolerance is not the same thing as intolerance itself. As CEO, Eich wasn't just a programmer or a talented coder, he was the public face and goal-setting leader of a non-profit institution that prided itself on inclusiveness and openness. Eich's donations to Prop 8, his non-apology apology, and his refusal to acknowledge his actions made him an untenable choice for this position.

Eich has the right to his beliefs, whatever they may be. He has the right to donate to political causes that represent his rights. And other people, including his employees, have the right to call for his ouster on the grounds that his beliefs and actions (and hey, donating *is* an action) create a toxic environment that's hostile to the goals and ethics Mozilla claims to embody.

He didn't just have an opinion. He paid cash towards an organization that sought to deny rights of kinship, power of attorney, inheritance, and legal standing to others.

I see no reason why Mozilla or other organizations should be tolerant of people who attack the fundamental rights of others to have their relationships recognized by the federal and state governments in which they reside. Such campaigns are not personal expressions of belief -- they are a concerted attempt to deny the rights of other humans.


"Also... having a different view of things is not the same thing as trying to fund legislation to have your bigoted views become law."

Hah, wait what? These "bigots" are trying to fund legislation to have their views become law? That's also exactly what the pro-gay marriage camp is trying to do. What's the difference? You point fingers at each other and yet failing to realize who you truly are.

You look down your nose at people who look down their noses at people? Hah, what a parody.


You are ONLY allowed to say what we want you to say.. in other words, if it is bad for business, work in another way for the company


Tolerance is to accept that others may have different views than yours. You may not agree with their views, you may even be angry and totally reject their views but your rejection is also based on _your_ view, theirs based on theirs. You can tell others that their views are completely wrong/disgusting/etc. sure but once you try to impose that view of yours upon others by any means, you become by definition, intolerant.