If the intense focus and criticism of Brendan Eich's Prop 8 donation didn't force him out of Mozilla two years ago, why would it now? From the LA Times piece linked above:
"The record of the donation has been available since at least 2008, but it was rediscovered by the Twittersphere last month and the information -- and outrage -- has continued to spread, with more than 5,000 people tweeting about Eich's contribution Tuesday." |
Examples of the messages tweeted are linked to the LA Times article. Here are some examples:
- Brendan Eich, inventor of JavaScript and discriminating homophobe.
- Apparently, Brendan Eich, father of JavaScript, isn’t as versatile as his language. He donated $1000 in support of a gay marriage ban.
- truthy || falsy values – like JS, Brendan Eich also has issues with equality
- The creator of JavaScript, Brendan Eich, paid money to keep people like me from getting married.
- Brendan Eich, While I admire your contributions to the web community, yours actions against humanity are deplorable. UNFOLLOW.
- Not cool brendaneich not cool at all
- Sad to see that Brendan Eich donated $1,000 to support Prop 8 in California.
- another good reason to support Dart over JavaScript: JS creator Brendan Eich put $1000 towards gay marriage ban
- I’m so used to awesome programmers being awesome people too. Really disappointed that Brendan Eich bucked the trend.
- Seems like Brendan Eich is for an open web, not an open society.
- Oh, Brendan Eich is a bigot.
I expect the rabid rightwing to ignore Mozilla’s statement and Brendan Eich’s statement about the reason for his leaving. Rightwing regressives have a new and very specific ideology to push with regard to gay people:
Gays demand tolerance yet are the most intolerant of all.
|
This bit of inside-out upside-down logic opens the door for discrimination. It’s the basis for laws like the one that was recently vetoed by the Governor of Arizona. It starts with a claim that bigots are being victimized.
A message that popped up on my phone a few days ago set me off:
Gays are doing to Brendan Eich what Whites did to Blacks in the 1960s.
|
Here's my reply:
Show me a link to any news that he was firebombed, dogs were let loose and high-pressure hoses were opened on him, or he was left hanging from a tree.
|
As if the plague of rightwing bigots isn't bad enough, there are some self-avowed liberals and progressives who get conned into thinking that there’s some noble principle in defending Brendan Eich.
He’s being persecuted for what he thinks/believes.
|
Is “Equal Rights For All” hard to understand? It's a founding ideal of our republic. Does bigotry supersede “Equal Rights For All?” Or is it the other way around?
Brendan Eich supported an unconstitutional and illegal initiative. It was ruled so in US District Court. The US Supreme Court issued a historic decision on June 26, 2013, rejecting an appeal with further instruction that affirmed the district court’s decision.
Should liberals and progressives have any sympathy for this individual’s right to his opinion? Americans think and believe what they like but some want to impose their particular beliefs and opinions on others leading to conflict.
Brendan Eich's freedom to believe what he likes was never in jeopardy. That's a red herring. He certainly has no right to expect anyone to agree with him or endorse his views, considering the courts' opinions on the matter. And he certainly has no right to expect his fellow citizens to remain silent about his beliefs. Anyone who has difficulty with the free-exchange of ideas isn't cut out for democracy. Note: Free-exchange means all voices are heard. It can get pretty rough but its suits most Americans. A thick skin and a level head are good accessories.
Should liberals and progressives defend Brendan Eich’s right to donate $1,000 to an initiative that would have denied a universal human right to a minority?
Absolutely not! There’s an issue here that somehow got lost. It’s about the advantage of privilege and class to access the political system and influence it with money. How could anyone miss that especially with the other Supreme Court decision from June 26, 2013, Windsor v United States? The case originated from a dispute with the Internal Revenue Service over a $363,053 tax liability incurred because Edith Windsor’s marriage wasn't recognized.
As a privileged white man earning $700,000 a year, Brendan Eich could easily afford a $1,000 contribution to keep the obvious financial advantages of marriage from people like Edith Windsor and also from many others who are denied those financial advantages and can’t afford a $1,000 political donation.
Where is social justice?
Here was a golden opportunity for liberals and progressives to wave the banner on an important issue. But some with the loudest voices distracted attention from social justice issues to promote the Heritage Foundation's red herring instead.
I have to wonder if another demographic minority instead of gay people was the object of such bigotry and hate whether the rightwing could have claimed persecution.
Was Brendan Eich forced out by mob rule? Is his story a real life version of “Lord of the Flies.” Fuck no!
The US District Court and US Supreme Court are on the side of people who spoke up about Brendan Eich’s bigotry. That’s not a mob. They had the rule of law on their side and every right to their opinion. He turned and ran. He flounced. A real leader doesn't do that. An 8 year-old boy named Cartman does. The situation could have been handled differently with communication, understanding, and sincerity.
But the rightwing wouldn't have been able to score any points off that.
|