SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
We didn't act like you'd expect Mozilla to act. We didn't move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We're sorry. We must do better.
Brendan Eich has chosen to step down from his role as CEO. He's made this decision for Mozilla and our community.
Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all.
We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public. This is meant to distinguish Mozilla from most organizations and hold us to a higher standard. But this time we failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community.
As of this time, there is no named successor or statement on who will be taking over Mozilla's leadership.
(Score: 2) by metamonkey on Friday April 04 2014, @04:04PM
I think you still need to tolerant intolerance. There are worthwhile arguments on both sides (admittedly the prop 8 media campaign was pretty disgusting from what I've seen). But just because something seems like a good, fadish idea now doesn't mean it is. There are social ramifications to messing with something as fundamental as the family unit. I do not know what all of those ramifications are, as I am not a prophet.
This has turned into a "if you're not with us then you are my enemy" situation, even though only a Sith deals in absolutes.
I'm Catholic, and my Church says dudes can't marry dudes. Now if the state wants to hand out licenses that says they can, well then they can. Render unto Caesar. I'm hesitant to deny people something they want that doesn't hurt me directly, so I abstain from any gay marriage vote. I will not vote for, because my Church says no, and I will not vote against, because I am not against gay marriage.
It's about 45 years now since Pope Paul VI published humanae vitae, the encyclical that addressed things like contraception and abortion. It was right when the pill came out, and right when that 'Population Bomb' book came out and people were terrified that in 20 years "hundreds of millions of people would starve to death" because of overpopulation, and therefore saying no to contraception was a laughable idea in American media.
But we didn't have the famines (except for those caused by political strife, not because there wasn't enough food). Nobody's eating soylent green. Current UN estimates say that population will cap out at about 9 billion in 2050 and then steady off or decline.
At the same time, pretty much all of Pope Paul's predictions about what would happen by opening the door to casual sex via the sexual revolution have come to pass. Destruction of the family unit, particularly among the most vulnerable like the poor and minorities. Sky high divorce rates. Neglected children from broken homes. Disease. The debasement of sex. The abundance of pornography has fundamentally altered the way young people approach sex. Young girls feel like they have to compete against porn stars, and are snapping naked pictures of themselves to put online, desperate for the attention of young men who'd rather jack it in front of a computer. Society is pretty fucked up. Paul wasn't wrong.
The Catholics at least are consistent, regardless of sexual orientation. Homosexuality isn't a sin, just homosexual acts. But so is masturbation, extramarital sex, and contraception. Basically anything that is not "open to new life," because sex is seen as a "procreative act." Homosexuals are not evil, it is not a sin to be a homosexual, there are homosexual parishioners, there are openly gay priests. Homosexuals, however, are called to chastity, just like heterosexuals are in instances where there is not the capability for the creation of new life. Catholics are expected to exhibit self-control, and telling that to an American? Good luck. And when we talk about the "sanctity of marriage," unlike the secular population, we mean it. We can't get divorced. Being Catholic is not easy.
The concept of gay marriage didn't even exist 20 years ago, and now it's a "right." You might say the Church (or other religious people opposed to gay marriage) is "intolerant." I would say you still need to tolerate that intolerance, because we as a society are not that smart. Before changing the fundamental building block of society, the definition of a marriage, which has been the same for thousands of years, a healthy debate is worthwhile. That debate, however, requires tolerance of people with a dissenting view, like Mr. Eich. Dissenting does not necessarily mean "hate," it can just mean "caution," because there is moral ambiguity here that a fool like me is simply not equipped to navigate.
Personally, I am not interested in stopping people who want to get gay married. I have attended two gay weddings for gay friends of mine, and they seem very happy. I would not want to stand in the way of that. But I do not claim the wisdom to understand the long-term ramifications of changing the fundamental building block of society so swiftly. Advising caution is not hate, it is not intolerance, and these opinions that dissent from the "Hollywood after school special" party line deserve tolerance and consideration. I know I'm a fool, but I'm very wary of anyone who thinks they aren't.
Okay 3, 2, 1, let's jam.