text:
All corps with a very young, college educated workforce are pervaded by this mentality among it workforce – particularly tech firms, unless it institutes an actionable plan to mitigate it within its HR dept. Speaking of which, that is the core well-spring from where this births itself. They hired them. Let them eat cake – or control them. The youth today definitely feel entitled to their jobs. No, I have never had a job. Duh!
Oooops! That was me stealing the thunder out of the mouths of those chomping at the bit. Doesn't make anything I said less true.-
Well thank ya little lady, thank ya very much….. buye buye… have a nice life.
You going to stop using Google too since they fund the parent company of Mozilla and have a great record on LBGT issues. Wanna bet that this site is also enabled by LBGT workers and companies with LBGT support policies and benefits. Likely yes, gonna turn off TPNN, how about turning off the internet too. Hope you do.
No. But I'll probably send them hate letters in that I'm staunchly opposed to the LGBT community and not afraid to state it. Now, little pickle puffer, let's have some more PC bullsheet from you. "Oh my Lucifer, did you just hear what that little girl just called me? It's the end of the world as we know it!!! Quick! Everybody break into a Broadway dance number!!! Oh, the horror! The horror!"
So, Mental Glitch Girl, here is some additional information for you to misprocess. Just because people are decent enough to live and let live and support the rights of others does not make them the other person. So, I am a LBGT supporter, no apologies, but not LBGT. Here is why. LBGT Americans fight in our wars, pay taxes, save our lives in operating rooms, patrol our streets in uniform and largely follow our laws. It is simply disgusting and mentally sick to deny them equal rights in our nation. You are a kook to want to do this but that is OK. You will not succeed to deny your fellow Americans their rights over the long term. The TP is made for little minded folks like you, and I am glad for it. The fact that you are so vocal against LBGT people, citizens, fellow Americans says nothing about your cause and everything about your limited capacity to process a logical thought, a compassionate thought or act as a decent enough human being. You are not clever enough or smart enough to understand that and that in itself is very sad. Please do not reproduce.
ok, get off your soapbox.
Disgusting? No. Mentally sick? No. It's a person's choice as to what they support or don't support. What IS disgusting is when a group attempts to tell a person what he or she can or cannot think or say. That is mentally sick as well as disgusting.
Each person must decide for themselves what is acceptable. It is their belief. Each person is entitled to that. The only problem comes in when they attempt to tell other people what they should believe in.
You accuse TP of being made for little minded folks. Do you not grasp the simple concept that by beign here, by posting as you have that YOU make up TP as well, so you are little minded.
Really Brian. It is disgusting and mentally sick to deny others their rights as American's. That this is not visible to you, well, disturbing.
I am not telling anyone what to think or say. I am just saying the LBGT thoughts (? that) are that of a Kook. Kook away everyone, no one cares.
You are not entitled to being a Kook, that is an accident. You can not feel entitled to deny others their rights under the constitution and accept their contributions in war, their taxes and their legal conduct and then say too bad for you I do not like LBGT therefore I say discriminate. Not logical.
I am most certainly not TP, and posting does not make me so. I can post on say the KKK site or the republican party site or vogue's blog and not be a racist, a conservative right winger or an owner of a vagina. Hope this clears that up Brian.
Newsflash for you yeahwhatever.
Denying someone their rights? I must have missed a WHOLE lot it class. Show me where in the Constitution it is a RIGHT to get married?
I mean there is a right to..
Freedom of Religion. Speech, bear arms.. and the list goes on but where are these rights you keep saying are being denied?
"The LBGT thoughts are that of a Kook". Thank you for clearing that up and admitting it. Many would agree that LGBT thoughts are Kooky.
LGBT are entitled to be how they want, they are not however entitled to tell another what to think or say. And another newsflash for you Yeahwhatever, by your bashing of Eich and supporting of the Mozilla protesters you ARE attempting to deny Eich his actual right.. the freedom of speech.
Show me where LGBT were disciminated against by Eich? He voiced an opinion, as you did when you say you support LGBT.
By saying others are little minded because they use their rights of free speech, that makes you little minded. You can argue that all you like.
Pretty sure if the human species had been meant to be asexual we would have been designed that way. But by LOGIC, we are not.
Enumerated and unenumerated rights. If LBGT are citizens they have the same rights as other citizens. Therefore they have the right to marry. Not hard to process.
You may not like this but that is too bad. Mind your own business when it comes to other folks exercise of rights.
Eich has freedom of speech, no doubt. He is using that right now to affirm his support of LBGT rights, he is hypocritical on this.
Freedom of speech does not equal having a magic shield of invulnerability or even being perceived as proper leadership. Rights have responsibilities and consequences.
He did not discriminate, he is entitled to spend his money as he wishes. However, it is simple. If Hobby Lobby had a pro-life CEO he would if discovered loose the confidence of his management team for being out of step with corporate cultural values. Eich, same but different issue.
Uisng the bully pulpit to deny others their rights is small minded. Free speech and vocalizing a disagreement is fine, just do not try to legislate away rights. LBGT's are not taking anything away from straights. Period.
The Constitution, as defined by SCOTUS, clearly makes Marriage a Civil right.
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival…. To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
Yep, and that is what is at the heart of things. This specifies that a person of any race may marry another. I think this arose as a result of a bi-racial couple. Anyways, yes, marriage is a civil right, as they define marriage between a man and a woman. Not a man and a man or a woman and a woman, which is why that was left to individual states. Of which there are under 10 which acknowledge let alone permit same s e x marriages within their borders.
And soon, there will be fifty, based on "equal protection" arguments, and "full faith and credit arguments".
You are on the wrong side of history, my friends, just as the racists who supported miscegenation laws were.
IF that comes about it will not be for a very long time.
I disagree.
There will be a gay couple, legally married in state A that will be denied marriage rights in state B where they have moved. I suspect this will happen within the next 5 years at most. They will have the have the standing to carry this to SCOTUS. SCOTUS will be forced to accept the full faith and credit argument, and "game over".
IN FACT, this is one of those situations where the harder the opponents fight, the sooner it will happen.
It is PRECISELY equivalent to Loving V Virginia which invalidated all state laws against mixed race marriage (some of those states still have those laws on the books but they are unenforceable due to this ruling)
This war will not be won from the pulpit or the ballot box, it will be won from the bench.
Actually they can try to use "Full faith and credit" if they like..
States which deem same s e x marriages to be illegal are not required to honor them. Full faith and Credit argument falls flat.
[ I officially dislike TPNN's censor now lol]
Your links are broken.
AND you miss my point. It is precisely like Miscegenation laws.
Many states had laws against it.
It was overturned in one state by SCOTUS. Adjudged to be unconstitutional.
When that happens, it is unconstitutional to enforce similar laws in other states.
"Equal Protection" applies ( gay couples can marry in state A, but not in state B ) AND full faith and credit applies because actions legal in state A MUST BE acknowledged as legal in state B.
This two pronged approach will work, I assure you.
And, Brian, your legal opinion carries very little weight even here where the bar is set demonstrably low; you were not even aware that ex post facto laws were illegal under the constitution. If you want to argue law you should go to school and get some training on the actual law as written.
Nope, I got your point. Full faith and credit clause gives state the leeway so no, the full faith and credit argument will fall flat.
DOMA has to be ruled Unconstitutional. Until that is done, no state is required to honor same s e x marriages.
Doma WAS ruled to be unconstitutional. The federal government must now recognize marriages that are legal in any given state.
So the very next argument WILL BE a 'full faith and credit" as I made above, along with an equal protection argument.
"What else ya got?"
Full faith and Credit does not force states to acknowledge same s e x marriages. Still gotta get by that one.
ACTUALLY, by it's very definition, it does.
A legal act in one state cannot be ignored by another. Contracts are binding across all others.
THEN, when you say that citizens are afforded civil rights in one state, that they DO NOT have in another, you are treading on "equal rights".
It is the intersection of these two classes of judgement, when considered together, that will force the law to change in the states that still have discriminatory laws.
Let's bring some clarity for you, shall we?
If you bothered to read and comprehend, not only what Eich actually said but what is said here, perhaps you would not be in so many arguments and coming off as a complete.. well, let's use your term "Kook".
First off, let's look at what Eich actually said. He said he opposes LGBT unions. That is not the same thing as saying he discriminates, which is a whole other ball of wax entirely. You would do real well to look up the two definitions so it gives more than a passing familiarity.
Second, This is a Tea Party site. By posting here, even once, you and every other person make up that site, whether you acknowledge it or not. Whether you are part of the TP, the DP or an Independent. But little minded people with Myopia tend to miss things like that.
"The TP is made for little mind
I suppose I'm so little minded, that explains why I can be found here regularly pointing out the tea partiers' ignoring their own dissonance while flinging arrows at the left for doing the very same thing? You really have absolutely NO credibility saying that to me. The more I point out to TP'ers their nearsightedness, the more vociferous their attacks on me are. But here I am, nonetheless.
Unlike the myopic zealots, I call a spade a spade, whether its white, black, blue or red. And people just can't handle that. Now, as to the G A Y S constant banging of the drum of their own cause, they are front and center in this myopic tunnel vision. They actually display (with regularity) the turpitude to actually attack family values. In that vein, I fight back. But then, I'm not wittle confused 'victim' created to serve the system. -
OK, Glitch martyr girl, hooray for you and your being a force for change in the TP. You refuted nothing with your little self congratulating biopic.
So refute this. LBGT Americans fight in our wars, pay taxes, save our lives in operating rooms, patrol our streets in uniform and largely follow our laws. It is simply disgusting and mentally sick to deny them equal rights in our nation. You are a kook to want to do this but that is OK.
And I still have the right to not only hate what they stand for but refute it verbally with whatever verbage I chose, so take your rainbow colored unicorn frolicking diatribe on the vaulted and honorable G A Y parade of 'humble servants' to humanity and shove that up your excuse for a reproductive canal.
"All your posts just attack".
You're foul mouthed, self-serving, name calling, stereotyping…everything the Tea Party does NOT represent.
Why don't you run along and have a nice ice cream cone and watch some cartoons. Oh…and leave the thesaurus at home.
"Please do not reproduce." Well I would say the same to you, but that would be stating the obvious, would it not, pickle smoker?
Typical fascist liberal attack mode…religious beliefs are "not progressive" so they are automatically wrong. Your intolerance is not very "progressive".
Oh crap. I will now need to transition back to Internet Explorer. Damn! It won't be easy, but I will do it.
Bye bye Mozillla.
So it is not OK that the CEO of a high tech California company backs anti-gay marriage initiatives. Mozilla is, and will remain, a place that includes and supports
everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, age, race,
ethnicity, economic status, or religion.So Eich has to go as he is incompatible with the Mozilla culture. It would not be OK that the CEO of Hobby Lobby backs gay rights or womans reporductive rights when the companies agenda would allow businesses to discriminate against gays and
lesbians and deny their employees contraceptives under a maximalist
interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause of the United States
Constitution.Nothing to see here, Eich belongs atr Hobby Lobby or another like minded company but not in the Valley working for a compnay with progressive California values.
It's his company. The employees can work elsewhere if they don't like it.
I hope he fires everyone of the SOB's!
You could not do this in the Valley let alone California.
In CA anyone can be fired for cause, period.
The "Cause" has to violate some part of the businesses code. If it does not do that then they can still be fired but then face paying unemployment and being taken to court.
Examples include:
Excessive tardiness, Dress code Violations, threats, Quality of work/Production, Insubordination, theft or violation of privacy content etc.
Insubordination. Yeah. There's that. They would be looking for a new job right now.
Ahhh California, great place to be From! Couldn't pay me enough to go back there!
Actually depending on the employees history and what the business code, it CAN be done. It's all in what the employee has done before and if they are violating anything now.
Actually, it's not HIS company. He is the CEO, means he was appointed by the board. If enough of the board believe and listen to the outrage voiced by some at Mozilla then they can vote to have him removed as CEO. Unless he violates some tenet at Mozilla they will end up paying him and handsomely.
Mozilla is Google's company in the end as they fund operations through a non-profit that is the parent company of Mozilla. Google is well known for LBGT support.
"deny their employees contraceptives"
WTF?? Does he not provide them a paycheck? You are incomprehensible. -
Hobby Lobby must follow the law. For-profit corporations are required to cover the full range of women's preventative care, including birth control, intrauterine devices and emergency contraception, at no cost to their female employees. No, providing a paycheck is not enough under the law. You seem to read and misinterpret and complain a lot, sure you did not miss this little article on Hobby Lobby and the SCOTUS. That would be incomprehensible.
then move your HL comments to the little story on HL. In case you haven't noticed, this story has nothing to do with that.
Or the gaystapo has to go.
Making an effort to go back to Explorer. A little difficult, but I will prevail.
Try Chrome. You'll wonder why you didn't do it sooner.
No one cares kicker.
MAC and Safari
Yes Google Chrome
Hate internet explorer oh no I just committed a hate crime. -
Google is the primary funder of Mozilla.
CEO to ex-employees… "Puk you and the sissy bicycles you rode in on."
Thanks to your leftist buddies you can be replaced with illegals at 1/3 the cost. Buye bye… have a nice life. !-
Well said.
Wow, not even close to what Eich is saying. He would not support your thoughts, OK strike that, your ranting silly post.
A number of Mozillians, including LGBT individuals and allies, have stepped forward to offer guidance and assistance in this. I cannot thank you enough, and I ask for your ongoing help to make Mozilla a place of equality and welcome for all. Here are my commitments, and here's what you can expect:
Active commitment to equality in everything we do, from employment to events to community-building.
Working with LGBT communities and allies, to listen and learn what does and doesn't make Mozilla supportive and welcoming.
My ongoing commitment to our Community Participation Guidelines, our inclusive health benefits, our anti-discrimination policies, and the spirit that underlies all of these.
My personal commitment to work on new initiatives to reach out to those who feel excluded or who have been marginalized in ways that makes their contributing to Mozilla and to open source difficult. More on this last item below.
Sorry, feel asleep during you rambling rant.
What did you say he's going to do about the persecution of Muslims and Christians by the homosexual activist? -
Excluded and marginlized? Sounds like a lot of corporate EO babble.
You're showing typical leftist intolerance by joining in with the whiners who are complaining about a man who let his opinion be known. If you or those who don't like what the Mozilla CEO says, stop using the product and/or find another job.
See how simple that is? -
Right on.PC run amuck.Majority being forced to live by the immoral code of a few
I have already stopped using it. I am also recommending that everybody I know stop using it.
I have also publicly stated MY opinion of HIS freely given speech.
Free speech is a great thing.
STFU and get back to work!
Thanks for the link.Legitimizes our concern over how these degenerates behave and their agenda.#HideYourChildren
Good post…. this link explains the thoughts of the new gay order! The most intolerant of all species…and are trying to take over and ruin society with their sexual choice as the rule of law! I personally think if this is what they really want, cordon off the state of California, where a majority of the LGBT's live, and let them go at it! After a few decades with only their type of crazies living with each other they will die off…cause lets face it…they cannot reproduce…thank God for that!
This straight, white, veteran who settled in California would welcome jettisoning the social and financial deadweight that is the religious right and the states they dominate. "Have at".
They can't reproduce…without carefully thinking about it and planning for a very wanted baby. Are you sure that's a bad thing?
Ha, ha a stupid ignorant despicable gay wrote this.
I'm beginning to get the feeling that you are bucking for the head job at our future re-education camps. Where do we go to get measured for a uniform and get our haircut like Marshal Obama. Then we will ALL be equal. Socialist nirvana at last.
Wow. That comment was over the top and not based on anything remotely real. Yikes.
You have your opinion and I have mine. In life that's the reality.
Supporting CEO's opinion is not part of your job requirements, so STFU.
You show a modicum of intelligence and it makes the uneducated pissed off. I say keep fighting for Equality and Acceptance and I wish you well in your endeavors! Keep on Rocking.
Something tells me Nick, that you've never tried to hire a top tier programmer in the Bay Area. It's an incredibly competitive market. They get wooed with high salaries, fancy perks, and basically anything they want. Since many programmers are former nerds who were picked on, they tend to have a pretty strong sense of justice. It won't be easy to find ones who are willing to work for someone who opposes marriage equality.
If Eich steps down, I switch to a different browser.
Not much good comes from anything forced. If he is forced out guess that means we are too. .. I don't get why this is happening…looks like everyone just wants a lot of free press to me
Me too.
add me to that
I will also switch to a different browser. This totally insane. Have they been mistreated? Are they losing money? No. So they need to sit down and be quiet.
Eich won't step down. If anything, this "controversy" will draw more people to Mozilla.
Not in the Tech world it won't..
It's already happening.
What was happening again?
It's real simple. It doesn't hurt Mozilla a bit. This has already started drawing more app developers to it's door. Sorry if you fail to recognize that fact. Eich will not be stepping down.
mhmm..Keep telling yourself that.
lol Face it son, if he was forced to resign it would have stated that. He chose to all due to some close minded bigots that can't let the past stay in the past. It was not an issue 6 years ago.. only now.
..and since your comment is awaiting moderation, I will go ahead and reply to your redundant argument.
I'm a joke? Hardly. Rather the person that clings to the notion that a "boycott" of a browser over comments and a donation made over 6 years ago is a joke. Is that who the man is now? Nope. Funny how noone spoke a word of this until.. wow.. 6 days ago when he was named CEO.
No, the tech world is not a backwards hillbilly environment. But that also does not mean that just because you say it will happen, that everyone will fall lockstep in line with your grand plans. Heck, the LGBT community itself cannot even come out as a whole and say they condemn the man for his actions.
On countless blogs there are those that are saddened but understand that it was his opinion and free speech but are not going to carry it further. There are those that will boycott but don't delude yourself into thinking that this is anything lasting or impacting.
Will you make a statement? Yep. Will it cost Mozilla some cash and maybe some app business and developers? Sure. Will Mozilla rebound and continue to grow and draw new talent and come back stronger with Eich at the helm? Yes.
I'll throw your comment back at you but with a twist. If you don't like it, simply uninstall the program. See, I know a tad bit more that backwards jokes like you. I know it's just a browser and if I am displeased with it all I have to do is uninstall or simply switch to another inferior browser.
In the end, it is the people that will make or break this thing and I am willing to bet that most people look at this and what the LGBT are doing over comments made 6 years ago and the fact that no discrimination is being done and will simply shrug and go right back to using Firefox and other Mozilla products and apps while this episode, like the by-product of protein… passes on the wind.
Oh, side note, the fact that Alan Turing was gay has zero bearing here and worse, no point in the conversation. The man's dead.
Hardly anyone uses Mozilla to begin with. So to be perfectly honest this only hurts them as a major majority were probably gays and gay friendly users. The internet is a gay place.. Accept it! I'm out!
Keep telling yourself that. lol. Doesn't make it true or even remotely accurate but it is amusing to watch you flounder and puff up ineffectually.
care to comment now, after he was removed? You seemed so very sure that the bigots would win this one.
He was not removed. He resigned. There is a huge difference. The bigots did win, in making him choose to resign rather than damage a company he loves and help found. This will actually only hurt LGBT in the future.
Elucidate, please, on how this will hurt my LGBT friends? I see no downside to holding a bigot accountable when who gave money to help pass a law that has since been adjudicated to be unconstitutional.
And you are arguing over semantics. If I call one of my guys into the office and say "you have no future here because your coworkers don't trust you", and that engineer then quits, he does so because of the pressure applied by hs coworkers.
"You can't fire me, because I quit" is a very common expression. In the last 5 years, I have let 6 people go, only one was "fired" … the rest resigned after I told them "fix this or I have no use for you".
Are you saying that I had no impact on the 5 who left?
Simple. Being LGBT is a choice of life. It is not something they are born to and had no choice in. This is illustrated by several members of the LGBT community coming out with seminars on "How to be Gay/Lesbian". As this is now a choice, and choice is what Eich was blasted for.. do I need to go further?
You make a spurious assumption above.
I am straight. I never CHOSE to be straight, I just am.
I believe that being gay is no more a choice than being straight.
I believe it is like which hand is dominant. Left-handed-dominance was proclaimed to be a disorder.
Is it possible to force a right handed person to use their left hand? Certainly, but never well, and not willingly (I spent months writing with my left hand after a bad car accident rendered my right arm unusable, I went back to right handed when my arm was healed).
For many decades, teachers tried to force those who were left-handed to write with their rights. They had little success, and this does not happen anymore.
Can a gay person be forced to pretend to be straight? With enough pressure, anything is possible. But I do not believe that sexual preference is a choice, and the majority opinion of psychologists now concur with me.
Your argument fails again. I am begining to think "you're not here for the hunting, are you boy?"
You can make all the arguments you like. When members of the LGBT community teach seminars on "How to be Gay/Lesbian" that indicates it is a choice.
They choose to be LGBT. The argument has not failed simply because you say it does. A Gay CHOSE to be with another man. A Lesbian CHOSE to be with another woman.
They might have feelings but it the choice to act on those feelings that defines.
A person is not a Criminal until they commit the act but by your argument above, it is out of their hands. Your argument fails.
You are so very wrong on this, and impassioned recitation of your beliefs makes you no more right.
Frankly, I do not CARE if you believe homosexuality is "wrong" … until you try to use the law to enforce your beliefs on others.
NOBODY is trying to pass a law telling you who you should spend your life with, why do YOU believe that you have that right over the lives of other adult citizens in this Constitutional, secular, society?
And to equate homosexual acts between consenting adults to a criminal act is prima facie evidence that you are not thinking clearly on this.
lol Figured you would just jump the gun on that Mick. I could have used a number of different situations to illustrate choice. That was but ONE that comes to mind.
Actually there is no actual evidence that supports your position that it is NOT choice.
YOU are the one asserting it is a choice, you must prove that.
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. "
Are you ALSO asserting the being left-handed is a "choice"? Please prove either one, with some kind of double-blind study.
My marriage to my wife is in no way impacted by two gay men or two gay women marrying. It really is none of my business, except insofar as I swore to uphold the constitutional rights of all citizens, and I will not see the rights of a minority being trampled by a majority.
I never said handedness was a choice.
It cannot be proven that s e x ual orientation is a choice just as it cannot be proven that is inborn. However when members of the LGBT community give seminars on how to become gay/lesbian that denotes choice. That moves it out of the realm of inborn.
Why does it make a difference to you?
You were the one who asserted it was a choice. Make your case?
I have NEVER HEARD of a seminar that would turn people gay, until you offer evidence both of the existence of AND THE EFFICACY OF such seminars, you have still not offered any data.
Even if folks BELIEVE its a choice, we legislate based on FACTS, not beliefs.
I presume you are christian? So, would you agree that all christians should be judged by the stated beliefs of some small subset of christians? Say the WBC?
EVEN IF SOME STUPID LGBT folks think they can "pray the straight away", that is merely an assertion of your interpretations of THEIR beliefs, still not evidence that being gay is in any way a "choice".
You STILL bring no evidence to the table, merely fairly clumsy arguments to support your assertions.
As to why it is important to me… my oath to "support and defend" I took when I enlisted at 17 had no expiration date and the people you have a problem with are citizens of this country, with every right to be treated with respect and equality under the law.
Anybody who violates OR ADVOCATES violating the constitutional rights of any citizen becomes "enemy:domestic:one each" … to be dealt with appropriately.
Nice try. You have nothing to say that is NOT choice. There are two camps of thought on LGBT. One being choice and one being inborn. Neither can be proven.
Efficacy? Don't make me laugh. The fact that there ARE seminars is enough to point to choice. Fact is it IS choice. They choose how they act and what they do.
I took the same oath you did Mick and nowhere in there is there in any way any mention of the right to same s e x marriage. Sorry but that is the facts of the way it is. LGBT is a lifestyle CHOICE, plain and simple. You have provided nothing to the contrary.
A : it is obviously HUMOUR. But I can see how you wouldn't understand that. There is a lot you don't seem to understand, I am not sure if you are being disingenuous, or are just incapable of comprehension.
B : I DO NOT NEED TO PROVE IT IS NOT A CHOICE. You are the one asserting it is a choice. Not me. SO PROVE IT IS A CHOICE.
as to "efficacy" , yes. take people, send them to that show (again, a joke), and THEN see if it turned them gay. If you can show me proof that it did, then maybe you will be gathering some actual evidence that it is a choice.
BUT EVEN IF IT IS (I will posit for the sake of argument it's a choice) I don't like brussel sprouts. HATE THEM, in point of fact. Because I hate them (even THINKING about them makes me a bit nauseous) should I then try to pass a law saying "nobody in america gets to eat brussel sprouts"?
You have avoided on many occasions answering WHY the actions of other consenting adults affect you in any way.
I don't care if my neighbors eat brussel sprouts. I do not care what consenting adults do with each other. Why do YOU care so very much?
lol Um actually YOU DO have to prove it Mick. You make the assertion it is not choice. You have offered zero. You can look on this seminar as humor is you like, it does not change the fact that it does not take a seminar to teach a person "how to" if their lifestyle is anything BUT choice.
The woman who puts it on says it is not a joke but an actual seminar, but hey, if you want to call it a joke, so be it. That is called denial.
Why do I care? This lifestyle is a perversion. It causes more harm than can be imagined. It cost a least one life if not more. It's like a cockroach, hasn't hurt you but you don't want it around just the same.
I have no need to prove it one way or the other, because I am ALSO asserting "it is none of my business" I do not believe it is a choice, but even if it were I would consider it a PERSONAL choice, akin to your christianity. i.e. something I get no say in until you try to push it on me.
YOU are asserting it's a choice, and that it is a "perversion". Prove your case on both, because I am just not seeing it. I care not what consenting adults do with each other. They are no threat to me, and like "brussel sprouts" nobody is demanding I eat them.
The case is already there Mick. You can accept it or not. LGBT is a lifestyle choice. A CHOICE and that is backed up by motivational seminars such as the one this lady offers. If it were not a Choice then why the seminar on how to be a lesbian?
I cannot speak to what is in other people's minds (and certainly not to what is in yours) . AND IT DOESN'T MATTER.
You BELIEVE it is a choice. You have offered no evidence it is a choice, you have offered up a seminar as evidence? And EVEN IF IT IS A CHOICE … you have given me no evidence that you should get to limit the choices of other citizens.
If I go to a seminar put on by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Earth_Society , does that mean the earth is flat? THEY BELIEVE it is flat, I will grant, that DOES NOT MEAN it is flat.
Are you REALLY that stupid? Truly?
If you are a representative sample of the intelligence of "the other side", then I am less and less worried. When it comes to reason, rhetoric, and persuasion, you "could not fight your way out of a wet paper bag".
You are on the wrong side of history, and what gets you the most is there is a little voice inside you that knows this to be true.
lol Weak, very weak.
You have offered no evidence that it is NOT choice. I get the same opportunity as everyone else to limit the choices. I vote, just like every other person in the US.
Are you truly that stupid? When a Lesbian, a MEMBER of the LGBT comes out and says it, we are just supposed to dismiss it? Can you really be that stupid?
You have your opinion Mick, just as everyone else does and that and 25 cents will get you a piece of gum. You offered no evidence to the contrary to support what you believe, yet you are far too ready to dismiss things off as humor. You assume far too much and research far too little. As far as the wet paper bag? lol Really? That little one liner is about as old as ..well.. stone underwear. To turn the tables on you, your reason, rhetoric and persuasion are lacking, well below mine, well below. Nice attempt at dodging.
And no, that little voice simply whispers that LGBT are an anomaly and will pass into history in time. As to wrong side? Nope, and history will bare that out. Sad part is, as much as you want to deny it, as much as you rail.. you know that this is true, deep down and that scares you.
…and since I actually took the time to watch it and do a little research on her before writing it off as humor..
Turns out what she promotes and puts on is as a motivational speaking seminar. She is quite serious and this is not a joke to her. See I don't just dismiss a piece as humor without researching it. Research, that is a rather important aspect of law and being an attorney. It's what makes the difference between a win and a fail.
So, you assert it's a choice, you think SHE asserts it's a choice, and you say "that makes it a choice" ? Really? That's your evidence?
And you keep ducking the MAIN issue, which is "why do you get any say in the private life of other citizens?". It doesn't matter if they CHOOSE to be gay, becasue you get no more right to tell people "don't be gay" than they get to tell you "don't be christian"
As to "Research, that is a rather important aspect of law and being an attorney. " Are you REALLY trying to say you are an attorney? After not knowing that Ex Post Facto laws are specifically disallowed by clause 3 of Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution? Do you think me stupid enough to believe that?
lol You would assume things. You seem to do that an awful lot. YOU are the one touting your law studies Mick. I think you just proved you were stupid enough to assume. Again, it goes back to research. Impressive fail there by the way.
It IS a choice. You have offered nothing to the contrary. Not a bit of evidence. "How to be a lesbian in 10 days" pretty much says it all right there. The CHOICE to BE a Lesbian. After all if it were as you assert then there would be no need to teach people how. They would just know and do.
Ah, but it's not private is it? As Eich found out to his and Mozilla's detriment. If it was private then they would keep it in that aspect. But they don't. They want acceptance and they want it vocally. But acceptance is not good enough. They expect people to be vocal proponents of their lifestyle choice.
I never said I was an attorney. I SAID as an LEO I had taken courses in the law and jurisprudence. Yet more evidence of you poor reading comprehension. I am not at all surprised.
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. " Hitchen's Razor
YOU have asserted that it is a choice. You have offered no evidence, you have merely offered up somebody else's assertion.
ON THE OTHER HAND … I have said "I believe it to be not be a choice, but even if it is, I get no say in it".
I would ask "is the difference clear to you?", but I truly fear it is not. I am beginning to believe you really ARE that stupid.
I do not NEED to prove it's inborn, because that is NOT germane to this discussion at the end. Even if it IS a choice (like your christianity), other citizens get no say in it.
Did I say or hint your were an attorney? I believe the wording I used was law studies. What was that about reading comprehension? Maybe you need to go look that up and study on it a tad more. Again you assume.
Pretty sure that a person the lives that lifestyle is in a better position to KNOW how it is for a fact that you do. And that is what SHE is doing.
lol See you keep throwing up Christianity. I'll bite and ask. Are you a Christian Mick? Unlike you I won't assume.
I was raised catholic. I am now an agnostic.
Oh, and to "Pretty sure that a person the lives that lifestyle is in a better position to KNOW how it is for a fact that you do. And that is what SHE is doing."
Yeah… you should not assume. I know MANY gay people. My wife of many years is bisexual. I ride with the "Legion Of Sin" MC, the only MC accepted by the HA that allows openly gay men and women to patch in.
I am straight, I am not stupid.
re"Did I say or hint your were an attorney?"
Yes, you did "Research, that is a rather important aspect of law and being an attorney. " You were either saying *I* was an attorney (which I knew to be untrue) or asserting *YOU* were one (which I knew to be ludicrous). YOU were the first one who brought up "attorney", from the get go I said I had been an LEO, not an attorney.
sit 100 straight women in a room and make them watch "How to be a lesbian in 10 days" .
AFTER they watch it, see how many choose to be a lesbian.
Unless large numbers have been converted, your argument is proven false.
( I am no longer an LEO, but I am a GOOD engineer and Engineering Manager, and I know how to prove or disprove a hypothesis)
Actually your above scenario does not prove a thing, other than it's CHOICE. Do they choose to be Lesbian and it would not take large numbers. What was that about knowing how to prove or disprove a hypothesis? Fail. I seriously hope your engineering skills are better than what you have presented here.
In any case, this is counterproductive and you are trolling so I'm ending this.
" I seriously hope your engineering skills are better than what you have presented here."
I have a 26 million dollar budget for my lab in FY 15 that suggests that my skills as an engineer are up to the task (and 18 years employment post EAOS). I won't bring up a 6 figure income, or the amount of my performance bonuses.
The "100″ number is for an adequate sample size. Look up engineering fundamentals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size_determination
If nobody who was straight at the beginning converts to gay, then that sample size would be adequate as a first posit, since between 3 to 10 percentage of the population (depending on studies) self identifies as gay, disproving as unlikely your hypothesis. If NOBODY converts, it's not a choice, OR the seminar lacks efficacy. Multiple studies would need to be done to prove the latter.
Eich will remain where he is. It's called freedom of speech people. Deal with it.
"freedom of speech" is enshrined in my most holy of writs, the US Constitution.
It says that the government may not censor the speech of a citizen.
Please tell me how this meets that definition? It seem to me that other citizens are expressing (freely) their opinions of his speech.
"freedom of speech" does not mean "freedom to speak without consequence". Citizen driven boycotts are ALSO a form of speech.
Because Mick, they are attempting to say that he should not use his freedom of speech to speak his opinion. He spoke as a person, not as a leader of the company. They are attempting to censor what he can and cannot say as an individual.
"They" being other citizens? How is that a violation of "freedom of speech". He is free to say what he wants, other citizens are free to express their opinion of HIS freely given speech.
If somebody tried to have him ARRESTED, or if any branch of government tried to limit his free speech, THEN there would be cause for concern.
I see no violation of the letter or the spirit of the constitution here. His freedom of speech has not been impacted at all.
For this "they" being some of the LGBT employees at Mozilla but also some of the posters here.
They violate his free speech when they try to make him step down/resign or call for his firing.
No. Violating his free speech would be arresting him or making it so he can't ever speak, publish, or contribute to campaigns again. "We won't work for you if you hold that opinion" or "We won't use your company product if your CEO holds that opinion" are social consequences of speech, not censorship or denial of free speech.
You are accountable to an offended public for things you say and do in public. If you don't like that, consider not making big public statements. This is life, not censorship
You don't quite grasp the implications of this do you?
If we follow your logic of thought out then each and every one of those that spoke out are then subject to your reasoning. "You spoke out, you don't like the consequences, consider not making big public statements." That sword cuts both ways.
He has the right to his opinion. When he made it public … he opened himself up to the free speech rights of other citizens.
I care not the private beliefs of other citizens, but when THEY make them public, they become publicly accountable for them.
I am not LGBT, but I find his public statements objectionable and hold him accountable for them, in the same way I would call out the CEO of an organization for publicly stating racist beliefs, or a CEO suggesting that paedophilia is okay.
He has the RIGHT TO SPEAK HIS MIND, he DOES NOT have the right to then tell me I do not have the right to speak mine in return.
If my CEO made racist comments (and I know him, he NEVER WOULD), you can bet I would be calling for his firing. This is the same kind of thing.
We have the right to our opinions; but when you speak them in public you should expect to held accountable for them ( in either positive or negative ways ) by your fellow citizens.
Did he make the statements as the CEO? No. Did he even make them while he was CEO? NO. These comments as well proposition 8 occured well in advance of him ever being named CEO.
He's not saying nor has ever said you do not but that is EXACTLY what the LGBT community is attempting to say, that he does not have the right to speak out against LGBT marriage. (Stupid censor keeps holding up any post with S E X in it.)
He CLEARLY has the right to publicly speak about any issue.
And folks who disagree with him CLEARLY have the right to speak out in response. Why is that hard to grasp?
It's not hard to grasp. What is hard to grasp about this setting a bad precedent.
Explain, please. What bad precedent?
Are you saying that SOME citizens should be able to speak freely, but then that OTHER citizens should not?
Law changes, we all know this and have seen it happen. Constitution gets amended etc and so forth.
Right now Eich has made a public statement and has some of the LGBT up in arms over it. If he gets fired over it, that then becomes a precedent for future law. It could become a model for anyone that speaks out publicly.
Your blog, since it is in the public domain then becomes firsthand testimony of who and what you believe in based upon your writings. All of this potential grounds to fire a person without true cause.
It becomes a precedent, sure. FOR CORPORATE ACTION.
It has nothing to do with the law.
I have a morals clause in my contract. If I say anything that causes my company harm, they have the right to fire me.
This has NOTHING to do with "freedom of speech".
If I had EVER said, for instance "I don't think women belong in the tech field", or "I would never hire an indian" (note, 4 of the 15 folks I have hired in the last 3 years are of Indian decent, ONE is a woman, so my statement above is purely hypothetical) , then my company would have every right to fire me.
Not just corporate. This extends to the entire business sector.
Let's take these folks at Mozilla. They are not speaking up about Eich. That can legally be construed as support for LGBT lifestyle. I as a developer can decide to cause financial harm to Mozilla for their actions.
They have caused harm to the company thru their speaking out. So yes it has a lot to do with Free speech.
I am still not following how it is wrong to hold people accountable for what they say in public.
I accept responsibility for my words and actions. It's part of being an adult.
Let us rephrase it.
If he had said "I do not believe that black folks should be allowed to marry", would you then say "black folks don't have a right to hold him accountable for his sincerely held and publicly stated beliefs" ?
ok, let's approach this from a different angle.
Does what you say at one point earlier in your life reflect who you are later in your life?
Eich made the comment long before he became CEO and it was not until he was named CEO that someone came upon it and now he is being blasted. This piece of Legislation happened 4 years ago… not a peep from anyone, until now.
Yes, my previous statements made as an adult should indeed be held against me. If my opinions have changes based on new knowledge, then I should make that clear.
I said horrible, homophobic, things when I was a young sailor (I enlisted at 17). If somebody called me on it NOW, I could only apologize for those statements while accepting responsibility for saying them THEN.
And, yes, if Hobby Lobby wins, it WILL get ugly, and EVENTUALLY Hobby Lobby will lose.
And I will be in the forefront of those calling for punishing boycots and other actions allowed by the constitution.
Because I am a free citizen of these Untied States.
Nothing that can happen here to Eich is going to set a precedent for future law; "the law" is not coming after him for his opinion. Other individuals and companies are (by using more speech, and threats of boycotts, all of which are also legally protected actions).
You are not legally protected in the US from employment consequences of opinions you express, other than narrow sets of people (College professors, and some government employees, more or less). Eich is protected for being Christian (religion is a protected state), being married (or not; marital status is protected), having children (or not; also protected), if he happened to be black or asian those would be protected, he'd be protected from being fired for being disabled.
If I worked for the Catholic Church, and publicly supported Planned Parenthood, and someone noticed, then that is not protected. They could let me go for that expression. Equally, Planned Parenthood could fire me for publicly opposing Abortions, if the situation were reversed.
These are already well established in law. They're social consequences of speech, not censorship, and they're not protected.
You don't know that. You can't say that.
Not all that long ago, blacks were slaves and it was legal by the Constitution. Not all that long ago, women were second class citizens in the Unites states and could not vote. Laws change as public opinion changes and sometimes that can happen rapidly.
Law is based upon what happens in individual cases and each case is unique and provides new perspectives, new wrinkles and ways of looking and interpretting laws. Who could have forseen years ago that Religion would be slowly stripped of our government by Atheists? Laws and perceptions change. What is ok today, may not be tomorrow. All it takes is a person with a case, a lawyer and a judge to hear it.
Yes, the laws change. But nothing can be made "retroactively illegal".
Slaveowners were not prosecuted under new laws for holding slaves when it was legal.
People who spoke out against allowing suffrage were not arrested for previously disallowing women to vote.
As to religion being stripped out of government, it had no business being there in the first place.
So, I am not sure what your objection is, please give me case law or actual precedents.
mm.. have to disagree. They are making things retroactively legal and dismissing charges against people so the reverse in theory should be true.
There is no case law that I know of.. yet.
Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3.
Laws may be repealed, made less stringent, yes, but the reverse is specifically disallowed.
Sorry, I guess I should have told you I was an LEO, and have taken courses on law and jurisprudence.
Funny…if the roles where reversed someone would sue the company. Say an employee said I am for the lgbt community I am all in for the gays…or I am gay. That person cold not and would not be fired. They are expressing their freedom of speech, and choice without any consequences. Why is this man not allowed the same right? Why is it that he cannot express his thoughts or beliefs without being fired. It is all BS. Freedom works both ways.
There is a significant difference between the fiduciary responsibility of an IC and a CEO.
When I was an Individual Contributor I could pretty much say what I wanted outside of work, and expect no repercussions.
As a manager now, that is not true. In roles as manager/director/board/COO/CEO our Morals clauses come into play more and more, AND any speech made by you that has a negative impact on the bottom line or causes negative consequences for your company may get you discharged.
The higher your position, the more susceptible you are to these judgements, and (frankly) the smarter it is for you to keep your mouth shut about your personal opinions, and speak in public only of your business beliefs.
I AM NOT SAYING he does not have a right to an opinion, I AM saying that when he publicly speaks AND that public speech hurts his company, he can be held accountable.
Feel free to advocate for negative consequences, I won't stop you, that is your right. See if you can get these employees fired.
"have at".
But you and I both know that's not happening, right? He has already been fired, the protestors won.
That sound you hear is history passing you by.
This is more than 'speaking his opinion;' it's aligning with a group in support of a proposal that seeks to keep a group of people from having the SAME rights as EVERY ONE ELSE in that society. People are boo-hooing because he spoke up publicly and now is seeing the results? Bear in mind, by comparison, we're still living in a country (and a world) where people are still murdered for daring to be honest about their sexuality. And you lot are daring to whinge about Mozilla employees calling for his resignation? Cry me a river.
I WILL CLEARLY STATE that I STRONGLY support his right to say anything he wants that is not threatening. the Constitution I swore to uphold allows that.
But he does not get a pass from others expressing their disdain and denigration. Those citizens ALSO have a right to speak their minds.
[Repost, got censored]
Every person is entitled to their opinion Alex. Proposition 8 and his support was not denying anyone any rights.You speak out in favor of LGBT same s e x. He speaks out against. Does that make you any better or worse than Eich? No.
We are not talking about the rest of the world. We are talking about the US.
Note I have strenuously avoided calling him a bigot, or said that he does not have the right to an opinion that is different from mine. HE HAS THAT RIGHT.
I have merely said that once he brought his personal, private, opinion into the public realm, it is appropriate for the public to comment on it, and to hold him accountable for his freely spoken word.
Many of my neighbors are black. It is no business of mine what they think of me, or even of what they say about my ethnicity in the privacy of their own homes.
But if they were to publicly call me "cracker" or "honky" … or use the "gentrification" word ( code for 'rich white folks buying our houses") … then I get to comment on their public words.
This is not like when our brother could say "no backsy" when they punched you as a child, I still have freedom of speech, as do all other citizens.
[Repost, got Censored]
It's not aligning. It's a man saying that he does not support same s e x marriages. Not that he does not support LGBT or anything else. The claim of Bigot is moot. -
freedom of speech DOES NOT mean you can say anything you want and not have consequences. All it means is you cannot be arrested for your speech
Like anyone would care what browser a homophobe moron chooses.
labeling someone who supports tradional marriage as a 'homophobe moron' is the basest kind of intolerance there is.
So the reason you oppose EQUAL right based on their sexualtiy is????
You are NOT a homophobe? Really? …are you sure?
Homophobe, it doesn't mean what you think it means. Perhaps you better look it up.
This is not about a man or a woman's rights to marry. This is about a man, having a point of view and choosing to exercise it as is his freedom of speech, a given right and having to endure bigotry for that freedom of speech.
Has he discriminated against anyone? Nope. Far as I know every one of those at Mozilla that are LGBT are still employed.
By supporting any political advocacy that attempts to stall the rights of ANY human, regardless of their sexual orientation, Eich IS a homophobe. This is not just a 'point of view', this is action that is intended to curtail what should be even rights across the board.
Which is why they have a right to work for someone they trust and believe in.
We do have equal rights Mr. Phillips. Every man in this country has the right to marry the woman that agrees to marry him, and every woman in this country has the right to marry the man that agrees to marry her. What we don't have is the right to act on every notion that comes into our mind.
1. ALL forms of intercourse (excluding rape) are a matter of CHOICE.
2. One has to CHOOSE a person to have it with.
3. One has to persuade the other person to CHOOSE to do it.
4. One has to CHOOSE a location for it.
5. One has to CHOOSE to remove clothing that is in the way.
6. One has to CHOOSE to actually shove it in (or get shoved into).
7. One has to CHOOSE to continue to do it until satisfied or interrupted.Now, perhaps you would care to enlighten us all how YOUR INDIVIDUAL CHOICE OF SEXUAL PARTNER somehow (magic?) confers upon you ANY special rights
or privileges! -
So when did you CHOOSE to be straight? Oh it just something you was…yeah you're an idiot.
You still haven't answered the question, twinkles.
What makes YOU so special?
Did I say I was special? Why do you think straight people are special and they are the only ones that deserve the right to marry?
Because, twink, marriage is a RELIGIOUS RITE.
It is NOT a POLITICAL RIGHT.
Therefore, since YOU are attempting to force YOUR "religion" on MINE, that makes YOU the one who magically believes you've got some sort of "special" right to drop your scat on a few MILENNIA of history and tradition.You are not "special".
You're merely another pervert. -
So the 1,100+ rights enshrined in law that are based upon marital status are religious based?
Do you consider a hetro couple married in a registry office with no religion involved are really married or pretending to be married?
Not playing your game – no diversions on this one, kid.
Regardless of the religion – even your "religion". the Big Gummint you worship – "marriage" is (and always has been for pretty much all of recorded history) between hetero's.
…you people are a non-reproductive evolutionary dead-end, so even Darwin is against you.You are NOT allowed to use your false idol of Big Government to FORCE your beliefs onto MY beliefs.
…the First Amendment says so.So – let's recap:
You have biology, history, tradition, AND the Constitution, ALL telling you you're ate-up like a soup-sandwich.
(and, I'll bet, a small voice in the back of your own head)…..must really suck to be you.
No it doesn't suck at all, I am hetro and happily married. I just think bigots like you should not be allowed to use the force of law to force your beliefs on others and limit the choices of people that don't hold the same religious beliefs of you, you know freedom from religion and all that.
"…you know freedom from religion and all that."
Do you READ what you write?
There IS NO "freedom FROM religion" ANYWHERE in ANY of the founding documents.
{helpful hint: atheism meets the dictionary requirements to be a religion, just as does marxism, global warming, and all the other crap you leftists worship}Eich was FIRED for the sin of expressing his "RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AND ALL THAT", because it wasn't the groupthink you lgbt Nazis DEMAND.
Obviously, you have ZERO grasp of the First Amendment, so here it is:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
http://usconstitution.com/documents/the-bill-of-rights/YOU creatures ARE the forces of intolerance, INTENTIONALLY VIOLATING Eich's rights.
Specifically, his rights of "free exercise", his "freedom of speech", AND his right "to petition the government".
{hint: that whole Prop 8 thing WAS him "petitioning the government"}Conclusion:
YOU lgbt fascists violated HIS rights. -
So a persons choice of sexual partner should limit their right to get married? The right to marry is a "special right", really? Since when? Does the marriage ceremony contain magic that angers your mythical sky pixie?
You know what I read when I saw your reply?
"How dare you be intolerant of my bigitory."
lol! you're sillypants
That's amazing! I read the same thing when I saw yours!
How very "inclusive" of you….
…hypocrisy much? -
Like anyone cares what a gay butt pumper does with his extra wide partner.
I bet you LOVE that kind of talk don't you??? Well, If you don't, just imagine how much I cant stand you stereotyping people as homophobes because they disagree with gay marriage.
So you think they should stay as second class citizens because……you like them?
No one said that Harry Phillips, except you. There is no law that says you have to agree and support everything from everyone. Most of us don't, even you.
WHO CARES! lmao you guys are cry babies!
Sorry to use the unfair tactic of employing facts, but here you go:
It was the odd, peculiar, unusual, abnormal, bizarre, strange, unnatural, queer intolerant "homosexual" whiners who started making the threats.
….so, just to be clear, WHOM – precisely – are the "cry babies"? -
The ones that think everybody should be tolerant of bigotry…… that's you cry baby.
Do you actually READ what you wrote?
The INTOLERANCE (that means "bigotry" in the English language, buttercup) is what YOU bigots used against Eich BECAUSE he dared to express HIS opinion.
…which is different from yours, thus all you people getting your panties in a bunch and screaming for his firing.How does it feel to be the intolerant bigot, sunshine?
It feels pretty good actually, I do not tolerate people based on their actions, you and your moron mates base your bigotry on a feature that they are not able to change, like their sexuality or their race or their gender.
Do not expect any sympathy or tolerance from decent minded people any time soon.
Your self-admitted bigotry is your choice – fine, enjoy yourself.
Someone having intercourse with their own gender is THEIR CHOICE.
If you think otherwise, then – by your very own illogic – "celibacy" would be impossible.
Ain't Logic beautiful?ALL INTERCOURSE IS A CHOICE, twinkles, and that is something you cannot spin away with your lies and rationalization.
As for you styling yourself "decent-minded", consider this:
You SAY that you are CHOOSING to be "intolerant" based on nothing more than your irrational belief that I am "intolerant".
You are the very definition of "arrogant hypocrisy".Checkmate.
Race and gender ARE NOT negotiable "choices" – genetic science proves that beyond a doubt.
….and "gender-change operations" are merely people punishing themselves for their own perceptions.
Whatever trips their trigger is fine by me.
I'm all for FREEDOM OF CHOICE – unlike you gayshtapo twerps who put on your hobnail boots and step all over people like Eich, the baker who refused to do a "wedding cake", and the photographer who refused to do "wedding pictures" for homosexual couples.
YOU people are the fascists demanding "compliance" with YOUR beliefs.
….strange, I've never read anything about any of you atheists being forced into a church at gun-point.Your self-admitted bigotry is YOUR choice – fine, enjoy yourself.
Someone having intercourse with their own gender is THEIR CHOICE.
If you somehow believe otherwise, then – by your very own illogic – "celibacy" would be impossible.
Ain't Logic beautiful?ALL INTERCOURSE IS A CHOICE, twinkles, and that is something you cannot spin away with your lies and rationalization.
As for you styling yourself "decent-minded", consider this:
You SAY that you are CHOOSING to be "intolerant" based on nothing more than your irrational belief that I am "intolerant".
You are the very definition of "arrogant hypocrisy".Checkmate.
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2014/04/03/3422750/mozilla-ceo-steps-down-after-backlash/ HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Congrats, twinkles, your 2% of the population isn't enough to keep mozilla afloat, so you've successfully shat upon another business, increasing unemployment and destroying more lives in your pursuit of relevance.
Proud of yerselves, eh?
Yup, you pukes are the very SOUL of "tolerance".
Hypocrite much? -
Wait, you think that the only people that will use Firefox from now on are the gays? There are plenty of hetro people that are NOT bigots.
I know to you it might seem like all hetros hate gays but you should visit more sites than this one and the KKK.
Again, I'm not playing your game of spin and diversion.
YOU people are the intolerant ones.
YOU people are the bigots who got a man fired ONLY because HIS OPINION IS DIFFERENT THAN YOURS.
YOU people are the fascists who demanded his head, instead of giving HIM the so-called "INCLUSIVE TOLERANCE" WHICH YOU DEMAND FOR YOURSELVES BUT REFUSE TO GIVE ANYONE ELSE WHO DOES NOT GOOSESTEP WITH YOU.Seig Heil, the lgbt Brown Shirts.
lgbt = the new KKK
I have no use for the Fornicators that don't like a Real Christian. Go Firefox's Brenden Eick. don't let the Fornicators try to rule you. Numbers 32: 23 II Chronicles 7: 14 Ecclesiastes 10: 2
The tail wagging the dog. Rather than the CEO resigning how bout the employees resign in protest?
Yep, if it were up to me there would be a lot of pink slips showing up in their mail slots on Monday!!
…and I like that idea. I need a better job that pays more money. Now if the news is right monday, I know who will be looking for hard working dedicated people.
Here we go again…
The militant bone smokers refusing to let someone have an opinion that is different from theirs, but in typical fashion always trying to jab something down somebody else's throat.
What did you say he's going to do about the persecution of Muslims and Christians by the homosexual activist?
How about people at worked are valued for the job they do?
How about being able to separate opinion and beliefs from work?
Pretty soon people will never say anything about a belief or an opinion or anything because someone will be offended or jobs lost.
Later we will all be driving the same car, same color, same house, same income, same cloths, same hair, and can only use these words and never use these ones, all football teams will have the same name, no scoring, no thinking, no questioning as we sure do not want to disagree or offend someone that has a different opinion or belief because if they do we will arrest them or fire them or tell on them.
There is NO relationship, personal or business, in which there is 100% agreement 100% of the time. To do so, we'd have to be machines/robots…& then there still is no certainty about there always being "100%" as machines/robots wear down/break/etc.
Do these morons at Mozilla think they are irreplaceable??? That they "know best"??? God help us!! Oh, I forgot…I've now offended these dipsy-doodles as I prayed, & to God. Tough bananas!!! -
And at some point all books will need to be banned and burned because someone might be offended by what's written in them. Anyone know what temperature paper burns? Maybe I'll go ask Ray.
Haha if I may point out, it has been the religious who have had a history of burning books, not secularists.
…those religious Nazis, for example.
Didn't know the Nazis were religious? Where in the history of the world did any one else burn books?
Oh really. Take a note from Cuba et all. They are all religious zealots there, banning and burning the Bible. NOT. Look past your sheeple views.
Eich. How dare you have a differing opinion AND expect anybody to allow it. We are now a nation that caters to popular beliefs. Other beliefs will not be tolerated without punishment.
We demand that you be ejected from your position in the corporation you co-founded.
We gunna burn u at the stake too cuz we taint got duh gaschambers bilt yet. Datz were we gunna trow everbudy ess dat piss us off.
Yes Mark, total sarcasm but it has a ring of our reality now, sadly.
Your reference to gas chambers in conjunction with your opinion on the topic is a sickening devaluation of the lives that have been lost to such practices. I MUST believe for the sake of my sanity that even the most radical opponent of sexual equality will look at this and realize how disgustingly awful your statement is.
"…radical opponent of sexual equality…"
Screw you and your strawman.
Speaking of sanity, most of the sane people here see that this is how it all starts… first they outlaw your opinions, then they outlaw you. Liberals are doing everything they can to silence their opposition: it is only a matter of time till they come up with the same "final solution" every other totalitarian has in the past…
Is it outlawed? Or is it just business? A company based in San Francisco may have difficulty finding good talent among those who do not believe in equal rights. It makes sense not to be openly against equality for all.
Funny thing, Mandy, is that gays and straights have equal rights. There is no place where a gay is treated differently under the law than a normal person. No man can marry another man – gay or straight. No woman may marry another woman, gay or straight. Equal treatment. The only difference is what they want – not how they are treated.
How very buddhist. I suppose any financial repercussions of this can be viewed similarly. Did you see that Ok Cupid has a message asking it's firefox users to discontinue use of the product? Ouch!
My statement makes no mention of sexual equality, for nor against,(read it again).
Hey,you didnt mention, Neither did I comment on sexual Orientation.
My comment is/was about the attitude of those who are trying to punish this guy.
So create a couple more new profiles and continue Trolling.
Hope all this does NOT mean the "employees" at Mozilla are really a bunch of gay bullies, but if so who needs them?
Why young people think homosexuality is the new
civil rights frontier in America is a mystery to me.I guess one
has to have something to believe in and crusade for.. -
Young kids are being taught this garbage. Please teach your children the liberal technique of jamming talked about in this article that will be in The Wanderer Newspaper soon: http://ordainedpraise-homeschoolmom.blogspot.com/2014/01/disagreement-is-not-judgement.html
Well written article, Thanks1
God Bless this CEO. The intolerant pukes who are "offended" by his deeply held religious faith need to read and comprehend the First Amendment to our Constitution as it relates to the free exercise of religion. Secondly, if one identifies oneself by their sexual preference, something is fundamentally flawed with their character. Get over it and grow up. There are truly important things to worry about in America. Your CEO's personal opinions and faith are not one of them.
This isn't much different from the "intolerant pukes" in One Million Moms demanding that Ellen Degeneres be fired as a spokesperson for JC Penny because she is gay. I don't think that Mr. Eich should step down or be fired, but intolerance plays out on both sides.
Ahhhaaa !. . . . The TRUE colors of the Rainbow are showing !
Get over it, marriage is between a man and a woman. Period
Why? Because the opposite would be in contrast to your Bronze Aged religious text? What a sickening notion.
No, because that is how we are built. Anyone with a working set of brain cells can see this simple truth. Just because you have a few brain damaged individuals who don't fit the norm doesn't change basic biology.
What he said!
We are built to procreate. You don't need marriage for that. Further, if procreation is the only reason for marriage well then you better force divorce for those who don't have children or after they don't plan to have children any more.
Excluding those for whom the institution was intended makes no sense even if you wish to set that straw man up. A strong family unit grounded in marriage is the cornerstone of and strong society. As you pointed out, marriage is unnecessary for procreation:it is even less necessary for couples who were never intended to procreate with each other. So: why is it necessary for gays? It is not.
I would love to post a response but the admin keeps deleting my responses. Oh well.
They should abolish marriage. End it. Plain and simple.
Instincts, not religion.
Evolution and creationism both require a male and female. No matter what, how, or If someone worships, as the old ad said " u can't fool mother nature".
So it's no ok to fire someone because their gay, but it's ok to fire someone because he doesn't support gay marriage? Like Dennis Miller says, "America 180."
Typical left mentality–if you don't agree with me, you're wrong and homophobic or racist or whatever other label they like to throw around. I say tough sh*t–I guess some of you are just going to have to take it in the rear!
There are hundreds of people that would love to work for this company. Tell em to hit the fkng road!
They are minority trying to force the issue down the throats of Americans with true values and Christian beliefs. -
If they don't like his views, they are welcome to go work elsewhere, right? No one is forcing them to work for Mozilla, right? Sooooooooooo, just quit if you don't like him. Oooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I see, he is supposed to cave into his employee's point of view. They could start their own IT company, and have their own deviant views on marriage, who's stopping them, right?
Just another example of the stupidity of the minority! Honesty is the best policy but not to a Democrat or any of their Minority Pools? These are Radixals that feel their time is now but it is ending ugly and with many Americans finally waking up to these loud, sad cases of Mommy or Daddy issues! God has given man woman for creating a family under the Democrats it can be anybody willing to pay and plus there's less "Methane Gas" with Gay Unions but a Marriage is a Blessed Sacrament which no court controls and the Lawyer's only care because it creates a Market? Lawyer's and Judges love creating Work For Themselves!
Washington, D.C.
Where lawyer's become Political Class material or Lobbyist and we allow this garbage! There needs to be laws about who can become a Lobbyist and a Politician! What jobs from College's are Honorable? Do we even need College's that don't support their Country yet takes money from Foreign Governments?
Should all Newspaper's inside US Colleges be 100% American money and Sponsored? Wake Up and let's help take back our Country from a lying Democratic Party backed by a very crooked and corrupt national phony media/entertainment groups that prefer Globalization over America! The UN over our own US Military? Wake Up!
OperationAmericanSpring.org -
FIRE the employees for insubordination !!! If Eich is forced out because of this , I will quit their browser and preach to others to do the same
You are 1000% correct GibbyD. I have been using Firefox for a long time and wont hesitate to change also.
For the life of me I can't understand why we let such a small minority of people dictate to the majority. Come on people, stand up and fight back. Until we do, we can expect the erosion to continue.
we did, remember Chic-Fil-A?? hundreds of thousands came out in support of the company, the next week at the LGBT protest there were 5 folks at a store here and there— all we have to do is out vote them. Of course they did that in several states, and the lib courts overturned the "will of the people"– THERE IS WHERE THE PROTEST NEEDS TO BE MADE. How dare the court reverse an election by the citizens of the state?
It's because our liberal politicians use these bullies as a tool to forward their agenda .. they have the money to make these nonsensical issues public.
Eich, don't budge one inch. Be faithful to God who asked us to "multiply and subdue the earth" and said the homosexual GL lifestyle is an abominaiton to Him. These homosexuals are anti-God and anti all that our founding fathers gave us in our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Liberals are too brainwashed to understand that it is THEM that are the haters.. its their way or no way…
Could it be the liberal haters are helping to get rid of him because they want to give our rights over to their leader in WH like the others are…. Firefox supposed to be private but i am sure they want to change that too..what a bunch of fools..no brains to go along with a communist fraud
Really makes me rethink my love affair with FireFox! I support traditional marriage, as well. If the CEO caves, I will have to find a different browser to use.
That rainbow flag gays fly, what does it represent, diversity? Really? Certainly not diversity of opinion.
No. They like it because it'th fabuloth!
I fully support diversity, unless of course you have a differing opinion……LOL! The next tweet from Eich should be 'HELP WANTED'
It's a shame a person can't have their own PERSONAL beliefs anymore without retribution.
I really don't see what Eich's opinion on any social issue has anything to do with a web browser.
But, if the pro gay marriage bullies get their way, I will use a different browser.
I don't care what consenting adults do or who they do it with. However, when a certain group starts to bully others to gain support, I have to draw the line.-
I couldn't agree more! I've been using this browser for years, but if a bunch of self-centered bigots take over this enterprise I move on and let the world know them for what they are.
bigot – a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intoleranceliberals = a group of people who move their ideology forward through intolerance, ostracism, name-calling, hate, (really any means possible) = bigots.
The pendulum has begun to swing back to backing Traditional Marriage as it always does. A word of advice to Gays: Sometimes it's better to take what you have won and leave it at that. Or to put it another way, you've got to know when to hold them and know when to fold them…..
know when to walk away and know when to run you never count your money while sittin at the table there will be time enough for countin when the dealins done… sorry but that song is a life lesson that any and everyone should know
I completely agree. Many song's are life lessons and I think we need to pay more attention to what they espouse…
I switched along time ago
And let the queer bashing beging
Dragging the FireFox browser to the trash.
Gone. Good riddance. -
While i.dont agree with googles points of view.chrome is s great browser
it is his right as a Christian to belive what he belives. the last i herd this is still a free country. OBAMA would like to tear our constituion of this country and rip it apart and take our freedom away he is working on it. But the last i herd we still have the right to voice our oppinion. 2) fire fox stinks anyhow i use google crome it is greatttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
Google is very p[ro LBGT rights. And funds Mozilla. So, your point is?
what everrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Link to proof please.
Chrome kicks ff butt. When was the last time alt+ tab worked on ff anyway?
Went to the facebook of Mozilla, bunch of cry babies on there….
The guy has a right to his opinion…….. -
The Employee's at Mozilla need to get a grip and realize that they are being the INTOLERANT ones.
You don't see the liberals trying to ban consenting adults from getting married. Seems tolerant to me. I'm highly intolerant of irrational discrimination.
I can delete this browser from my machine… there are many others
How is all this nonsensical raving over sexual preference get into commerce anyway? -
Here ya go. Hang this in your office door window.
If they don't like it, QUIT morons! Go out and start your own business and hire all the gays you want and make the whole business about gay marriage if that's what you need to get the unearned moral superiority.
And then hire a straight person to keep from discriminating and let them fight you every step of the way to show you how it feels.
both sides need to mind their own business and stay out of each others private lives. how you live your life is your own personal choice not someone else's. how someone else lives their life is their own personal choice not yours.
Exactly! Allow people to have their own opinions when you express yours of just shut up. Having an opinion is not a hate crime. Why do I need to know a persons sexuality? Stick in my face and I will comment.
Time to fire those employees. Obviously they are not interested in doing their jobs. Plenty more out there that would be ready and willing to fill those vacancies.
Why do the gays and lesbians think that the world owes them anything, Traditional marriage has been around for thousands of years and it will last thousands more, just because they want to live a deviant life style they have no right to tell any straight person that they are wrong to support a traditional marriage. If I had ever supported the gays , they have turned my against them just by being so determined to make everyone think and feel the way they do. Homosexuality is a sin, God loves them and so do I love, but God hates the sin and they are living in sin. The Bible says God created man and woman and told them to go forth and multiply, it does not say he created man and man or woman and woman. Hope that this gentleman stays his course as it is the right one. And before I start getting nasty e-mails, I have gay friends that I would fight for, but they know how I feel about this and we still love each other, so don't start with the hate thing.
Was that employees or employee that opposed the CEO. Since they are employed by a company and they don't own it, my suggestion for them is that they find other employment.
There is no reason for the CEO to step down and those that oppose Christian Beliefs in traditional marriage, have the courage of your beliefs and open a slot or slots who want a good paying job.
Pack up your toys and tender your resignation and walk out the door and a job with those you agree with. -
Standing for what you believe to be morally correct is not bigotry.There's bigots and then there's hypocrite bigots. Most liberals are the latter.
It a shame that if you don't believe in a liberal point of view your hated and degraded. Do you see Christians coming out of church ready to riot full of hate and revenge no, only the left does this because we don't agree with them.
Sounds like the company might need to look for some new employees, since they don't want to work for their boss.
If they don't like the company they work for then quit. If the CEO support traditional marriage, good. He entitled to his opinion. Hope he stands his ground and doesn't cower to the lunacy of the left.
Fire the intolerant jackasses and leave Eich alone, or I leave Mozilla alone….seriously!
I get that our rights are ours to protect or stand for but what happened to the system? Don't folks file grievance follow procedure allowing business "as usual" during process… rather than ….. threats and all THIS?? Run the company or shut it down.
Unfortunately, this is all a sign of the times. There's absolute intolerance toward anyone who stands by their traditional values. Employers, afraid of public backlash, will side with the liberal garbage to avoid controversy. Just like the situation with Phil Robertson, it takes backlash from conservatives to help protect their right to voice their opinions. The moral decline in this country is rapid and alarming. Conservatives need to protest, boycott, or whatever else they can think of to protect our constitutional rights.
Fire them all and hire some good Christians.
You believe what you want just lets all live and let live….wait that's what they said ten years ago.
Leave Eich alone or I will leave Mozilla alone!! Seriously! Chrome is calling my name!
Maybe he will leave and start another browser and I can switch to it
I'm starting to believe the Muslims have it right. Maybe it's time the Christians went militant too and we simply extinguished these feces lickers off the planet. See we're about 75% of the population and you're around 5%. So if I were you I would shut your pie holes before more like me start to get ideas about how to deal with your kind.
Simple you don't like your boss find another job that's how it works in real life, end of story.
Eich should leave the corporation and take his considerable talents elsewhere. The ingolerants should use their talents to run the corporation.
What did you say he's going to do about the persecution of Muslims and Christians by the homosexual activist?
What's the problem here? The CEO has an opinion on a VERY controversial topic that the other board members do not share, so they want to remove him. What is horrible about that? That is how the real world works, on the left or the right. The fact that the vast majority of the board members want to maintain for there company a reputation which is in contrast to the opinion and/or agenda of the current CEO is a perfectly natural thing.
The Dem socialists are reaching into every aspect of America, and destroying the fabric of our country.
Both parties have damaged your country, do not blame only one side of the political spectrum; doing so is simply dishonest.
What party supports sodomy? I Left the democrap party about 25 years ago because they have changed sooo much from the time when JFK was my Commander in Chief. Left the Republican Party in the last couple of years because way too may of them (RHINO's) vote with the enemy! I guess I'm now Independent but can't imagine how I will ever be able to vote with the democraps because they have proven their hatred for the Constitution and American values.
Do you supposed the guy who wrote this is a Christian or a Republican?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65RGfRlSoH8
Due to cut backs, you are terminated perminantly. If you feel that doing your job and not expressing your feelings is more important, then please disregard this notice and wish the other employee's good luck that don't.
You know that if you don't support what the OWNER of the company supports, you can QUIT AND FIND ANOTHER JOB! Right? But you CAN'T demand they let go of what they built to suit the're employee's idiotic demands!
"their" Sorry, that drives me nuts. …built to suit they are employee's idiotic demands?
Liberals are only tolerant of other peoples' views if they are the same as their own. I stopped using Google because on Easter Sunday their picture was of Che Guevera. If Eich steps down, I'll be finding another browser. He is entitled to his opinion especially since there is NO evidence his personal opinion on gay marriage has any impact on his employees or how he runs the company.
The leftist have once again, caused a major problem where no problem existed before! These narrow minded idiots will pay the price for all the crazy things that they are trying to hand down…what goes around, comes around!
Keep a paper trail on the employees, then fire them. That's the easy way to get rid of them. Revamp your policies. Cut down vacation times, cut down sick leave by giving it a point system. One point per day, max 3 points in 6 months. Then out you go. I'm sure there areTHOUSANDS OF UNEMPLOYED TECH PEOPLE THAT NEED THOSE JOBS AND CAN KEEP THEIR PAYCHECKS SEPARATE FROM THEIR POLITICS. THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS THE HATCH ACT. MAYBE IT SHOULD BE PART OF YOUR POLICY TO. also training on rules of behavior in the work place. The government has that to. IT MEANS STFU AND DO YOUR JOB! It looks like a few employees are producing a HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT… time for them to find new employment elsewhere and mozilla to find some loyal employees. The United States Government does it, why shouldn't the private sector? You'd have a MORE PRODUCTIVE COHESIVE TEAM THAT DOESN'T LET THE CHAFE IN WITH THE WHEAT. If you have a union in place, no problem. Bring in micro managers and start changing you policy.
So, he speaks his mind and they want him to step down? Think i'll VOICE my opinion too by uninstalling firefox.. Its an okay browser, but its not all of that.. I refuse to support die hard liberals "my way or the highway" mentality.. Hope they crash and burn now.
I guess Mozilla is fundamentally a racist organization. Prop 8 passed because of overwhelming support from black and Hispanic people. One can't condemn Eich without condemning his cultural solidarity with American minorities. I'm not using a racist browser…
Freedom of Speech Opinion & beliefs, Tell the LBGT they can feel the way they want & I will feel the way I want, that's what it's all about. Don't back down CEO Todd, we're with you.
This is where the proof that this gay movement is nothing like the legitimate civil rights movement for black Americans. I have no doubt that Mozilla employees gay people. (This is a broad speculation, I have no knowledge of who is employed at Mozilla) Whether they know these people are gay or not they are employed there. As of this article there has been no report of Mozilla seeking to determine who is gay so they can fire them. If this were the 60's and the subject was Black Americans they would not be allowed to be employed at Mozilla, and Mozilla would be actively supporting the Klu Klux Klan as well as openly racist politicians to keep their company negro free. Then they still would not be satisfied and would give aide and support to any other means of delivering suffrage to black americans. This homosexual movement is attacking this guy as if he is doing all of that, but all he has done is support traditional marriage. Nothing he has said or done impacts a single gay person anywhere.
If he is forced to step down, or volunteers to under pressure I will research Mozilla so that I can delete every function they offer from my computer.
… goal of Progressive Socialist Communists – get everyone fighting each other. It has nothing to do with sexual orientation, race, religious freedoms, health care, 2nd Amendment.
Eich merely stated HIS views. Have seen nothing about him denegrating or threatening the views and beliefs of others. The liberal leftist twits of this world, and if your panties are in a wad over someone expressing a belief different than yours, you belong in that group, are always barking and bragging about tolerance, yet at every turn, their actions shout, "Hypocrit is my name."
I understand that this has been around since 1987 and it looks like much has already come true: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3023834/posts
Lets go to another browser and see what happens to their paychecks
I was just thinking the same thing. I use Mozilla, and I would like for Brendan Eich to know that I support him, but as for the intolerant "progressives", I would rather that they begin their trip to heII sooner rather than later. I would imagine that Eich is well off enough financially, so if the browser went belly up, the libterds could go collect unemployment and have plenty of time to think about how smart they are. On second thought, that may not be such a good idea.
He's the boss. Let THEM find another place to work or STFU!
If they don't like what's happening at work maybe they should work some place else. It's a free country and they have the right to find employment some where they feel better about their selves and their liberal intolerance.
They have inclusive health benefits, must he bow down to the LGBT god too? He's allowed to have opinions whether you like it or not. GMAB!
Polite society is just too polite. Most people put up with the childish antics of screamers and yellers because we just want them to go away. What if polite people held the LTBG folks and their ilk accountable and got right back into their faces? What if we just give it back to them in spades? There aren't that many of them. We have to out-alinsky the alinskyites. Let's just throw it right back at them.
I hope Chic-fil-A and Mozilla team up to create Cow-chick-a-wow-wow ™ internet browser. Bring in any device showing you use this browser and receive one small chicken sandwich.
So a person with different political opinions should starve in the streets? Yeah real good way to encourage people to support your idea of equality gay-marriage zealots.
If he steps down, he's an idiot. Since when do CEO's take orders from employees? I know of MILLIONS of people that would love to work there. So, if those employees don't like the CEO NOT stepping down, they can seek employment elsewhere. #liberalsarehypocrites
Does Eich not have the same right to have his own opinion as each of the employees?
He has a right to an opinion. He has no right to expect his company, employees, or consumers kowtow to his exclusion of God's perfect creation. As a Christian who was created by God to be gay, I am appalled by the CEO's comments and believe that the employees are correct
JC, you should check out this website. If for nothing else than to see a different perspective from other gay Christians.
I see a business that will be leaving California soon. You stupid Liberals screwed yourselves. LOL!!!
The question is did they do it in the butt? LOL!!!
The author of this article lays a red herring argument of tolerance when the issue is exclusion. The CEO wants to exclude and eliminate and entire class of people. The employees – especially given the values of the company, want everyone included. And if someone wants their religion to be the law of a company or the law of the land – which is the case here – they need to go to a different country. Our country was based on freedom of religion. The CEO is certainly welcome to his religion, but to shove it down the throats of the employees and consumers is wrong.
It sounded to me from his statement that he upheld the company policies of inclusion. Freedom of religion should allow anyone to hold to their beliefs. He's not shoving anything down anyone's throat as far as I can see. The LGBT community are the ones raising the outcry. And where do you get that he wants to "eliminate an entire class of people"? He never said that, once!
JC is just another lib pulling BS facts out of thin air and expecting everyone to believe them!
I already switched browsers, too much indifference on their part and no unity in running a company!
They should be putting there time to good use and deal with the plug in….
The gay community has driven a wedge in the populace.. divide and conquer… because he does not believe the gay way, he is castigated by the gay community… as many have mentioned, intolerance only seems applicable when someone speaks their position on the issue. I do not particularly approve of the gay way, but it is not my place to approve or disapprove. Live your life as you see fit. What you do and who you do it with, is none of anyone else's business!
It is typical of the political correct doctrine that those who do not agree are allowed to be viciously attacked. Their tolerance exists only for those who they agree with. Just as white liberals are the most racist of all people. Any black person who disagrees with their position, like Dr. Ben Carson, is labeled a race traitor and is subject to attack by both media and government agencies. It is really sad the way the left manipulates issues through their use of terms like tolerance. But then when you have not a single successful policy to stand on you really have few options for winning elections.
Chrome just became my default browser.
Fire them all! I'll come to work for you!
Firefox is one of the worst browsers out there. They're failing with or without this guy.
Time to clean house one by one.
If they keep on trying to remove this ceo, he should fire them and replace them with people who chose the biblical definition of marriage… Sexual choice was not a problem when he hired these fudgepackers, and they should be glad they have a job! Get over it or go away!
Those fascist employees are certainly welcome to leave and get another job…. I fully support Eich's right to oppose same-sex perversion.
You have no idea what facism is do you ?
From Webster's – "very harsh control or authority". which is exactly what the intolerant employees are because they don't even want to allow the CEO his right of conscience. It is YOU who is ignorant of the meaning
You could have said authoritarian. You could have said they were controlling. You chose to use the word fascist. A word that has a strict political interpretation. A word that brings to mind images of Nazi's marching in Berlin. I'm going to bypass the fact that Websters have given a very narrow view of the ideology failing to mention its roots in corporatism but that's not important hear. How exactly are the employees being fascist? By speaking? By making it known that they are not happy? How are they denying Eich his right of conscience? Don't they have equal right to their conscience.?
Oh so, me & Webster's is wrong and you are right… it is you who is narrow know it all !
Hey everyone, Kris is the thought police, clear everything thru it before posting
So talking points…
It comes down to the gay community wanting to adapt the meaning of the word marriage. Call it gayrriage and move on. Unfortunately, they won't stop even if they achieve all of the "rights" associated with marriage under a different name. "You are going to accept me whether you like it or not". " gay couple.
They work for him! Show theirs butts the door!
Just stop using firefox and send a mesaage to the employees through decreased revenues and THEM losing jobs for a change.
Hey Mozilla employees there are lots of us out her who feel the same way….deal with it !!!!
should a CEO be fired for having an opinion? Isn't that what is great
about our country? We can have difference of opinions, if that is the
way these people feel then perhaps they should work for a CEO that has
such an opinion. I find it rather hypocritical of the intolerance of
those with an opposite opinion. -
The comments are facepalm worthy. Intolerance breeds more intolerance. It was actually the Right that is/was intolerant to gays/lesbians/trans. Now that the intolerance barrel is pointing at you guys its like all sense of maturity, rationality and outright common sense has flown out the window and died on impact after a seventy foot fall.
Maturity, rationality and outright common sense have nothing to do with knowing that homosexuality is a cancer against civilization.
That's not a valid argument. That's an opinion. I don't care if you think that so long as you do not harm other human beings. You have that right. You have the right to your thoughts. You do not have the right to attempt to restrict the rights of other based solely on opinion.
Are not arguments made up with opinions? Do people not vote with their opinion? Not sure where you are coming from on this.
If you believe that people do not have the right to restrict the rights of others solely on opinion, then I hope you are voting against every politician who would attack the 2nd Amendment, and the right it guarantees to every law-abiding citizen.
Arguments are based on logic and reason. Opinions are based on belief. One is free to believe whatever they want. One can not argue with the goal of convincing others based upon opinions alone. I can not question your opinion that "homosexuality is a cancer upon society" because that opinion is based on belief and not on fact.
I do believe in the Second Amendment. I believe the right to bare arms is granted by the United States Constitution. I reject your premise because it's provable false. There is a huge difference between placing limits on rights granted by the federal and state governments and the denial and total elimination of rights. There are limits placed on the first amendment. There are limits placed on the 21 amendment. None of this has anything to do with the topic of this article btw.
So the idiots trying to restrict my second amendment rights need to be hunted down too? Is that what you are saying? Ok.
I have no idea how you reached that conclusion. I said nothing of the sort. For what its worth the phrase "hunting down" seemed to imply inflicting harm. Which goes against what I said.
Go get hit by a car Communist. People with your "Concept" of thinking and rationality is why this country is in the state its in. So much hate, so much bitching, so little understanding. Grow the fuck up.
You call me a communist because I think homosexuality is immoral?
Go buy a dictionary, prog-scum.
Not many people have died because of "the gay agenda". How many have died in the name of someone else's invisible imaginary friend? Religion is the cancer that kills. Coproencephaly is the disease that causes statements such as made by "straight".
kiss it momma's boy
Prime example of Tea Party "Maturity". The idiocy is sickening.
If he doesn't step down I will Switch to a different Browser
Need a link to IE?
If he does, I will switch. I hate a group that uses force , threats, and hypocrisy to shove their way of life down peoples throats.
I am using firefox now… I will not be bullied. The left is so petty and intolerant.
haha so they should all step down at accusing him because he supports traditional marriage… and they're judging him based on that, doesn't sound like equality to judge a man based on his ideals. He doesn't deny anyone gay work, just openly doesn't support gay marriage.
And why is it that we who believe in God and family, traditional values such as a marriage between man and woman, morality, religion, have to cow tow to perverts, queers, athiets?
Well mainly the XIV Amendment to the Constitution of the United States Section 1: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Also it's a fallacy to claim that the expansion of rights negates rights that were granted prior. I assume you're a man. I know I'm a man. Is my vote worth less than a man who voted in the 1916 election because of the XIX amendment?
Sure, Kris…and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment which says we can't be forced to put up with the irrational demands of someone else's invisible imaginary friend.
Wow Kris, So I guess you think you have the right to shove your views about anything or everything down our throats and demand we accept you on every level or we should be deprived of our jobs, rights, liberty, etc.
I demand that you grant equal protection and enforcement of the laws to all citizens of the USA yes. My views has nothing to do with it.
Kris, I got your message loud and clear. You demand…
Sounds like you think you're someone to be respected and followed. SORRY it ain't gonna happen. The perverts of the world all want to be respected yet they don't respect anyone or anything that isn't perverted. They twist and lie and can't even read and repeat a simple story like this one. Here's an example for you. "Employees at Mozilla, the organization that created the Firefox web browser, has shown their warped sense of commitment to "tolerance" by demanding the termination of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich because he dared to oppose gay marriage." and yet you said above"
"As for as your question goes no one is trying to deny anyone their job. Employees are voicing their displeasure. " SEE THE DIFFERENCE??? The story says "demanding the termination"And since you brought it up let's talk about rights. The government of the country does not give us our rights. GOD gives us our rights. That's the source of all good that perverts want to destroy. Marriage is talked about in most religious text that I have ever heard of as a union between a man and a woman, blessed by GOD not granted as a right to deviates who would perpetuate perverted lifestyles. Deviates who are reffered to as abominations in religious text. and, are my rights being affected by them? You bet your lilly white following they are. If I have to sell to them in my restaurant when I despise what they stand for, then my right to refuse service is undeniably affected. and, if I have to allow them to be teachers of children, my children, then my rights are being affected. By law I should be imprisoned for endangerment and child abuse if I knowingly send them into a situation where they can be taught perverted ideas such as Gay or Lesbian or Pedifile, etc. These people defy the laws of GOD. Instead of granting them equal rights they should be prosecuted for sodomy.
Perhaps those people that have a problem with Mr. Eichs views ought to go and work someplace else.
Mozilla, know this, if this person is forced out because of his views I will uninstall everything Mozilla on all of my electronics. I will ensure that everyone I know does the same. Tolerance is not a one way street.
Oh and the gist of this whole seems to be that pro-equality employee have used their personal social accounts to voice displeasure. An act that is protect the vast majority of the time by the First Amendment. Now if their actions violated contracts they signed with Mozilla or if they violated the companies policies and therefore could face termination I"m fine with that. But this idea of "they should lose their jobs for speaking" is asinine.
lose their jobs not for speaking stupid. They should lose their jobs for trying to force someone to think like their little pea brained selves.
If you honestly feel that people speaking their mind equates to trying to force someone to change strongly held beliefs than the rational one has for the beliefs must be pretty flimsy.
So standing up against bigotry and intolerance is somehow "intolerant"?? What a deluded way of thinking. Only one side of the equation wants to limit the rights of American Citizens. Only one side wants to treat tax paying American Citizens like second class, second rate people. Standing up and demanding equal rights for our fellow citizens is the *only* moral point of view.
You provided a perfect example of the last couple of paragraphs. This is especially frustrating since liberals do a complete 180 when the topic is abortion. They refuse to accept that someone can see it as a moral offense… a matter of right & wrong. Yet they use that tactic when discussing gay marriage.
The constant hypocrisy from the left is an endless source of ridiculousness.
There is no hypocrisy in my stance. I respect that you see it as moral issue and no one is preventing you from living by the values you hold for yourself. You don't approve of Gay marriage? Fine don't do it. Don't approve of abortion? absolutely fine, don't get one. But you are not entitled to force the rest of the country to live by *your* values. As my favorite Government teacher once told us, "Your rights end where my nose begins" The difference in the two sides is that one side wants everyone to make their own choices *for themselves* and the other side wants to make the decision *for everyone*
No one has claimed the right to make choices for someone else just by voicing an opinion that the "else's" don't happen to share. If a man is a bigot for saying he champions exclusively hetero-unions, then so is the man who subscribes to the "anything goes" school of marriage. The bigotry is simply maligned in a different direction — but it's still bigotry…and intolerance…and hate…need I go on?
Why is it that liberals and statists demand 'diversity', but what they really mean is 'you must agree with me'. That mindset is not being 'diverse' but tyrannical. Do NOT let them claim the title 'diverse' but give them the title of 'divisive' and 'marxist'…which is what they are.
Liberals do not want "diversity" they want conformity.
"Diversity" is just a ploy.
I don't let them get away with the title "diverse" and point out the hypocrisy every chance I get.
You know why they use "diversity" because "you must agree with me" doesn't work as well as the ruse of diversity.
Shut up and get back to work. Unless you want to be punished for your free speech, leave his alone.
Guess I'll go back to google!
If he goes, so do I. Google Chrome works fine, and is actually a little faster…
You can be replaced, clem.
Brainless Mozilla kids need to be put out of work…
I'm using Firefox right now.
If this @$$hat isnt gone by Wednesday I uninstall everything Mozilla ever created that I'm using.
Chrome is better now anyway
I thought you guys preached tolerance…
This is no different from One Million Moms demanding that JC Penny oust Ellen Degeneres as a spokesperson because she is gay. I do not think that Mr. Eich should be removed for his stance on Marriage Equality, but just recognize that this situation has played out multiple times with the sides reversed.
if the employee's of Mozilla do not like Eirh they are free to find employment else were.
im switching all my browsers to chrome
Whaaaaaat? Shocking. Mozilla has a CEO????!
You people, would you be tolerant of someone that is anti-Christian? Would you be tolerant of someone that is racist? What about someone that is misogynist? Would you be tolerant of someone that is a bigot? What about someone that is anti semitic?
No? But someone that is a homophobe is AOK with you huh?
Why are you making these comments?
You are making them into the air because they aren't directed at anyone!It is as if you are trying to attack Christians by saying they are all these things but wouldn't like if someone was anti Christian!
Let me ask you, who cares if someone is anti Christian?? I as a Christian know that I have the truth. I have been blessed to have it.
I do not agree with Homosexuality at all. But I don't believe we have the right to outlaw it!I dotn believe the federal Government has the right to outlaw an ideology. And YES Homosexuality is an ideology protected under the 1st Amendment just like Christianity is!
Freedom of Religion encompasses any ideological view which shapes a persons world view!
Why? Because someone could think of their own spirit or soul as greater than themselves because maybe they don't understand the spirit or soul! That belief shapes their ideology and their world view and they have the RIGHT to live their lives the way they see fit as long as they aren't hurting anyone else physically or financially!
There are some Christians who need to stop trying to fight to stop homosexual unions and need to start realizing that under our Constitution they only have the right to educate and try to stop homosexuals from thinking they have the right to sue a Church because tht church refuses to marry two men or two women!
Why? Because the church has the RIGHT to their ideology as well!! And if it discriminates against someone else then that's too bad!! discrimination is NOT in the Constitution!! But religious liberty is!!Do you see what I am getting at here?
The two sides are going at this all wrong!
Both are protected yet each side fights at what frustrates them instead of realizing they need to try to find Compromise and fairness because this Countries Constitution is all about FREEDOM FOR ALL!
Not just those who think like you do!
That includes you accepting Christians for the fact that they will never agree with homosexuality!!Again, I DONT AGREE WITH IT!! But I Think they are entitled to their right to practice what they want to practice and that is protected!
If the LGBT Community would fight over educating people on how the Constitution protects their rights and the Govenrment is holding their rights from them then they would win!!
Instead they want to BLAME another Group who DOES have their rights and freedoms and try to get those rights and freedoms taken away from them!! That is just as bigoted as they accuse Christians of being!!Ok, I have finally wrote this out perfectly. If you don't understand this I don't think you ever will.
We listened to you didn't we ? . . In fact, all five of you ! . . . You really should consider a name change to "Cybil" !
' -
Tolerant of someone anti-christian – no but there is not much I can do about Obama. Racist – Not much I can do about Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson or some of my in-laws, but I put up with them. Don't know any women haters. I believe the LBGT activists are bigots in their own right. I also tolerate anti- Semitic friends and relatives even if I disagree with them. It is their option to feel the way they do although I sometimes try to change their opinion in discussions, not with threats. That's what make this country great, people use to be able to disagree without worrying about being fired or defamed in the liberal media. It seems to me that since Obama became President, especially the second time, the "progressive" movement feels empowered to push their opinions/beliefs/agenda on everyone else with no tolerance toward others
i already switched to a diffrent browser, firefox stopped being user friendly awhile ago
There is nothing wrong with firing guys with colles fractures, lisps, falling off every other word and women who have mustaches, buzz cuts with attitudes of a bulldog. Surely there are unemployed technos who would jump at the opportunity for 20 per cent less.
You did not give us a phone number or email address of the Board chair so we could let him know we stand with the CEO.
Just DELETED MOXILLA! DONE!
There is something seriously wrong within the judicial system when laws which are overwhelmingly supported by We, The People can be overturned by one word from a judge…'one person circumventing the will of millions who legally utilized their ballots.
Judges have too much power when this is allowed to stand. This nation is founded upon the will of the people, not the whims of a judge.-
No, THIS COUNTRY was founded on the the rule of law, and the Constitution. NOT "the will of the people", except insofar as they appoint legislators who both pass laws, and appoint the judges to assess the Constitutionality of the laws.
This country was NEVER designed to be "majority rules" ( look up the phrase 'the tyranny of the majority" as it relates to our founding fathers).
The system is working as designed.
Amazing. Yet again, not a single source for your crap. Or, I should say, "fap-fap-fap". Guess that shows you to be (again) liars.
It seems to me if they don't like where they are working, they are free to seek employment elsewhere.
dear ex employees have fun on obamacare and food stamps. bye
Good for those employees. Love that "support for traditional marriage" euphemism, too…so, polygamy is cool, as is taking one's wife by force when slaughtering the neighboring village, getting saddled with one's dead brother's spouse, wedding one's rape victim (as long as one gives her daddy a couple of goats and some silver), etc.
Again, good for those employees. Screw that derp CEO, and the coproencephalic derps who are cheering him on. -
Interesting that TPNN has now twice quashed a comment I posted on this article. No vulgarity – just a challenge regarding the concept of this term: traditional marriage. Generally, I support what the Tea Party stands for, but I guess I'll have to rethink that since they want to sensor opposing points of view.
Apparently they don't want to be accepted, they want to be "embraced and loved". No place for that in the work force. They are not discriminated against obviously or they wouldn't be working there. It must be a fairly friendly work environment. So, if I love Broccoli and eat it everyday for lunch can I sic the ACLU on my boss because he hates Broccoli? No, only if he makes me eat it in the parking lot and everyone else gets to eat inside..
The only censorship appears to be by the employees. Tea Party people could care less. It's the whining and antogonism towards those that don't agree with them.. Tea Party peole are closer to Libertarians..
Eich needs to start a serious round of firings.It's a private company and they can fire whoever,whenever for whatever. Let the fired ones lawyer up but they will lose in the end as they signed forms that said they could be fired for anything when they hired on. Cut em loose Eich.
Check your employment law again, Ross. Even a private employer without a collective bargaining agreement with its employees cannot terminate someone's employment for what you term "whatever" reason. Especially when dealing with a member of a protected class, it becomes a bit more complicated than that. Even IF Eich wanted to terminate those employees who want him to resign, he opened himself up to potential litigation by being so vocal in his opposition to equal rights in the first place. The LAST person he would want to fire at this point would be someone who is LGBT. Lawyers would have a field day!
Sodom and Gomorrah comes to mind!
Before you decide to run off and switch to a different browsers, consider your alternatives: Safari (for Apple folks), Google Chrome, and Internet Explorer. If you've check out 2ndvote.com, you'll see Microsoft somehow manages to be more liberal than Apple. And that ain't easy, cuz Apple is pretty liberal. And Google? Need I say more? The story is about *employees* calling for Eich to step down. Of course, they could just as well go work at Microsoft where their lifestyle would be welcome, or Apple, or Google. Folks, there just ain't gonna be a "lib-free" browser out there, or a hamburger, or a car, or any mass-market product these days.
Liberals need a really hard slap in the mouth. DAILY!
No, you don't want a nation of crying men.
Mike, this straight, married, USN vet and "Liberal" welcomes you to try. I doubt it will work out for you in the way you hope.
Mick Magill
8410 Aster Ave, Oakland, Ca 94605
List of things I will NOT be tolerant of:
1. Racism
2. Sexism
3. Misogyny
4. Bullying
5. HomophobiaIs your list one short of mine?….yeah I thought you were a bigot.
If they force him to step down let's force then to get NEW JOBS!!!
Actually, now that I think on it, let them get Eich fired for voicing his opinion. Better yet, let Eich take it all the way to court. This will come back to bit each and every LGBT in the rear as they voice their opinion and can now be fired for that very same act. As they say, "What is good for the goose is good for the gander". Maybe then some of these people making these "Fire him" comments would stop and think.
Given that the gay population is 5% or less abd given that I've worked around a hundreds of developers over the past 10 years and only 1 of them was gay, I wonder who all these so called tolerant people are at Mozilla that want him to step down. I'm guessing the intolerant mob of haters, and by haters I mean people that don't believe in freedom of speech or the right to express your own beliefs are not employees of Mozilla but outside militants that are just pushing their agenda and lynchmob radicalism.
Marriage predates this country, the internet, and the abacus. Marriage, since the beginning of time, has always been a union between one man and one woman. Now, in the last 15 years, in amazing ignorance and arrogance, we're going to change the traditional family unit which is responsible for the growth of civilization and society, large families, and is for sure one of the most powerful social structures ever known to man. I would say 100% of everyone with a position on this issue is the product of one man and one woman, and many of those men and woman were married. You see, regardless, of what may be codified into law, marriage will ALWAYS be a union between a man and women, and nothing else because God ordained marriage. This is the only definition that survived hundreds of centuries and it is the only one that will survive hundreds of centuries more. Any other definition, if it was truly to take root, is the recipe for moral and economic ruin for any community, society, or civilization. Moreover, any other definition is seeking as an end goal a society with absolutely no moral code, values, or consequences for deviant sexual behavior.
We believe in tolerance, unless you disagree with us, in which case, we will make you pay…. what a bunch of hypocrites.
can't wait for the next article…
"Homosexual gets job at local church, sues employer for anti-gay speach"
How about we agree to disagree, without being disagreeable.
Or as Rodney King said "Why can't we all get along?".
"Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you
disagree with someone's lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The
second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they
believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don't have to compromise
convictions to be compassionate."―
Rick Warren -
When I worked for a corporation I never cared what the personal viewpoints of my CEO were. They paid me to do a job. I can't even imagine demanding a CEO step down because of his/her personal viewpoints. I am glad I am self employed. I love the last quote of the article. I never chose my browser because of the viewpoints of any one. But because of this debacle I will not be using mozilla.
Why is it the LGBTG community is NEVER satisfied with the gains they have made; they are constantly stirring the pot for more and more and more intrusion into the American society. Where does it end??
If Mozilla forces Eich to step down, I will be forced to change my browser. I hate it when companies force their political views down our throats.
If Eich steps down, I switch to a different browser. I am in FULL SUPPORT of the position AND the principles of Mr. Eich
How shallow minded to persecute someone for daring to have an opinion! They want equality but refuse to recognise Eich's freedom of thought. Eich should sue them for discrimination and harassment, to threaten someone's employment for thier beliefs is illegal.
Since when do you have to agree with someone's political or religious beliefs to work with them? Especially when it is in reference to the co-founder of your company. I am a Libertarian Atheist. I don't agree with hardly anybody on political or religious topics but at work I always manage to work well with others and lead a successful team.
No one is forcing these people to work there. If they do not like the personal beliefs of the their CEOs they have the freedom to leave their jobs and seek employment elsewhere. They are not being discriminated against on the job, so they have no legal complaints. Just like anything else when it comes to your job, if you are not happy there, leave and seek employment elsewhere. You have no right to demand that everyone must think as you do.
3/31/14, This attitude seems pervasive in the tech world; I'm a Chrome user, myself.
Sadly the worst thing about the TOLERANT is their intolerance. Like it or not people are NOT robots. They will have varying opinions. They will like different things. Vary occasionally will a group of people agree on anything. However, it seems the one thing everyone agrees on is to be totally intolerant while preaching tolerance of anyone with different views. Perhaps instead of America supposedly being the FREE country, we should become a country where we are told what to think and what to do at every move. Would the intolerants STILL be preaching on a subject they know nothing of – tolerance?
Switching to IE 11 wasn't that hard after all. In fact, I found that I have much more control over what is going on. Now on to Windows Live Mail.
If this had been a pro-traditional marriage group at Google, they would already be gone.
supporting anti gay legislation is not tolerant. its best to get government out of defining marriage and licensing, let consenting adults decide. that's having tolerance when no ones view is forced on another. marriage did not belong to government anyways
Well is he the boss or isn't he? If he is, then I would hope the malcontents are working on their resumes.
It IS a battle between right and wrong, good and evil- and the Left is Evil.
Sad bunch of intolerant little sissies.
Bye bye Mozilla.
Eich rightfully chose to express his view that gays shall never marry and to support legislation to ban them from ever doing so. Hmm, nothing wrong I see about that! Geez, I don't don't know what all the fuss is about. Damn minorities!
If it is a sincerely held belief the employees would be guilty of religious discrimination under Title VII. There are a lot of views that we may or may not find repugnant but the first amendment guarantees the right to these views and if religious Title7 does not allow for religious discrimination.
I uninstalled firefox.. Many in the gay community are making all gays look bad. It's becoming Bully Community.
i want to testify of the good work of DR ROBERTO AKABAH in the life of my only son God gave me and my husband.
my son was suffering from cancer of his private part that almost took his life,i was confused so also my husband was like we are going to lose the only son and child we had but God never allow that to happen by sending DR AKABAH to our rescue.
A friend send his Email address to us and immediately we contacted him he assured us that our child will not die and we never believed not until he sent what he called the cannabis oil to us and instructed us on how to apply it and after a week our son is up and sound like a new born baby.
So whatever the illness is today just contact the below email address like now.
i want to share a testimony of my life to every one. i was married to my husband, i love him so much we have been married for 5 years now with two kids. when he went for a vacation to France he meant a lady who en charm him with her beauty, he told me that he is no longer interested in the marriage any more. i was so confuse and seeking for help, i don't know what to do until I complained to my friend and told her about my problem. she told me not to worry about it that she had a similar problem before and introduce me to a man called Dr Saibaba. who cast a spell on her ex and bring him back to her after 2days. she ask me to contact Dr Saibaba. I contacted him to help me bring back my husband and he ask me not to worry about it that the gods of his fore-fathers will fight for me. He told me by two days he will re-unite me and my husband together. After two days my husband called and told me he is coming back to sought out things with me, I was surprise when I saw him and he started crying for forgiveness and that he never knew what came upon him that he will never leave me again or the kids. Right now I am the happiest woman on earth for what this great spell caster did for me and my husband, you can contact Dr Saibaba on any problem, he is very nice, here is his contact firstname.lastname@example.com