First, the back story [1]:
Less than two weeks after drawing controversy over his appointment as [2] CEO of the Mozilla Corporation, Brendan Eich has resigned from the position.
In a post at Mozilla’s official blog [3], executive chairwoman Mitchell Baker confirmed the news with an unequivocal apology on the company’s behalf. “Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it,” Baker wrote. “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.”
The action comes days after dating site OKCupid became the most vocal opponent [4] of Eich’s hiring. Mozilla offered repeated statements about LGBT inclusivity [5] within the company over the past two weeks, but those never came with a specific response from Eich about his thousands of dollars of donations in support of Proposition 8, a California ballot measure that sought to ban gay marriage in the state.
The notice of resignation does not clarify Eich’s future with Mozilla, a company he cofounded in 1998 and became CTO of in 2005. It also stands in stark contrast to an interview Eich gave to The Guardian yesterday [6], in which he defended his personal, political actions and said they would not get in the way of his work as CEO. “I think I’m the best person for the job and I’m doing the job,” Eich said in the interview.
It’s not often – well, close to never – when I agree with Andrew Sullivan, but he pretty much nails it here [7] (via [8]):
Will he now be forced to walk through the streets in shame? Why not the stocks? The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society. If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out. If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us.
Townhall’s Guy Benson rightly notes [9] that the “live and let live” mantra the activist gay left repeated over and over again in appeals for the “right” to marry has now been replaced by “conform or else”:
Americans’ views on same-sex marriage have shifted dramatically in recent years, with solid majorities now approving of what supporters savvily branded “marriage equality.” The trend is even more pronounced among younger voters; a recent poll of young Republicans measured super-majority support [10] for the practice. One of gay marriage proponents’ most effective and persuasive arguments appealed to many Americans’ “live and let live” sense of fair play. Hey, it’s a free country. The core idea was compelling: “Our love and our marriage doesn’t affect you.” They asked for tolerance, if not acceptance. And they won. Now we’re beginning to see what the disquieting “next step” looks like, at least as imagined by some of the loudest and most radical voices. Tolerance is no longer sufficient. Enforced celebration is the new standard. Those who resist will be labeled bigots, and may be subject to having their lives or livelihoods destroyed. We’re way past “live and let live.” We’ve moved on to coercion in the name of “tolerance.”
Give an inch, take a mile, etc. This was completely predictable but, of course, the left never listens – and I’m not just talking about the gay left or, as Tammy Bruce calls them, the “Gay Gestapo.” This is what liberals want – no diversity of viewpoints unless it’s within the realm of what they, especially those in positions of power in government, find “acceptable.” Anyone who denies the creepily fascistic motivations of these types of Democrats at this point is just a delusional ostrich. Ignore at your own risk. I won’t.