OkCupid website asks users not to use Firefox, cites Mozilla CEO's anti-LGBT beliefs

[Himanshu Arora]

Mozilla has been grabbing headlines for all the wrong reasons lately. After a few of its employees took to Twitter last week to express their disapproval of the new CEO, and the recent departure of half of its board members, dating website OkCupid has also openly come out against Brendan Eich. On Monday, the New York-based website's homepage greeted its Firefox users with a note asking them not to use Mozilla software to access the website.

“We’ve devoted the last ten years to bringing people—all people—together”, the letter said, adding that "if individuals like Mr. Eich had their way, then roughly 8% of the relationships we’ve worked so hard to bring about would be illegal”.

OkCupid President Christian Rudder said that he and the other co-founders decided to take the step after thorough discussions over the weekend. The company thinks that any OkCupid page loads would even indirectly contribute towards the success of an individual who supported Proposition 8.

The website claims that 12 percent of its approximately 3 billion monthly page views come through Firefox.

When asked about the OkCupid protest, a Mozilla spokesperson said that the dating company never reached out to them to share their intentions, or to confirm facts. He added that Mozilla supports equality for all, including marriage equality for LGBT couples.

Last week, half of the Mozilla board stepped down over Eich's appointment. Although the reason was not his anti-LGBT beliefs, it did complicate the situation further for the new CEO.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/56212-okcupid-website-asks-users-not-to-use-firefox-cites-mozilla-ceos-anti-lgbt-beliefs.html

 

[Guest]

After all the stuff I've seen on the WEB villifying this guy, I propose we just burn him at the stake.
Seriously, enough is enough.

 

[NTAPRO]

Trying to get people to convert to chrome I see...

 

[OliTheG]

I actually feel sorry for the guy.

He is basically being stigmatised and harassed for his beliefs. Imagine if this was the other way around. I don't think anybody truly doubts that a large amount of newer gay marriage rights imposed by government was purely to win votes, not because such people genuinely agree with it.

We live in such a backwards, politically correct and hypocritical society that one person is allowed to be harassed and bullied out of a job for one's beliefs, yet if another person has a popular view, they can literally make up a context and get somebody fired.

Sad, sad times.

 

[davislane1]

Sooner or later the hypocrisy of the current (my) generation will come back to bite them. When that times comes, I will shed not one tear of sympathy.

 

[Guest]

Just installed Firefox...enough said.

 

[Guest]

He's not running for political office he's a technologist. Instead of attacking him and claiming him to be an enemy how about spreading some love OKCupid? You are not just attacking him for his views, you are going after everyone who works at Mozilla. I agree that it would be nice if everyone accepted everyone else however we are all free to make our own choices. Maybe we should investigate which places OKCupid or their employee's have sent money to. What lurks behind closed doors?

 

[guyver1]

I actually feel sorry for the guy.

He is basically being stigmatised and harassed for his beliefs. Imagine if this was the other way around. I don't think anybody truly doubts that a large amount of newer gay marriage rights imposed by government was purely to win votes, not because such people genuinely agree with it.

We live in such a backwards, politically correct and hypocritical society that one person is allowed to be harassed and bullied out of a job for one's beliefs, yet if another person has a popular view, they can literally make up a context and get somebody fired.

Sad, sad times.

You feel sorry for the guy?

He donated $1000 to a cause which would see EQUAL rights stripped from a section of society.

Replace LGBT with black people or Jews and see if you still feel sorry for him... If you do, maybe you need to take a long hard look in the mirror at yourself

 

[davislane1]

I actually feel sorry for the guy.

He is basically being stigmatised and harassed for his beliefs. Imagine if this was the other way around. I don't think anybody truly doubts that a large amount of newer gay marriage rights imposed by government was purely to win votes, not because such people genuinely agree with it.

We live in such a backwards, politically correct and hypocritical society that one person is allowed to be harassed and bullied out of a job for one's beliefs, yet if another person has a popular view, they can literally make up a context and get somebody fired.

Sad, sad times.

You feel sorry for the guy?

He donated $1000 to a cause which would see EQUAL rights stripped from a section of society.

Identify one right a heterosexual has that a homosexual doesn't.

 

[guyver1]

The right to marriage (depending on the country/state)
The right to adopt
The right to not be imprisoned or at worst killed for being of a sexual orientation that is illegal/abhorrent

Just a quick search:
http://76crimes.com/76-countries-where-homosexuality-is-illegal/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death/


If you don't see the parallels between the civil rights movement of black/coloured people of the 50's and 60's and the LGBT movement now, then you are either ignorant or just blind.

 

[guyver1]

This image perfectly displays the same bigoted viewpoints just in different decades:

http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/genderandsexualitylawblog/files/2008/11/gay_000306marriage.gif

 

[OliTheG]

You feel sorry for the guy?

He donated $1000 to a cause which would see EQUAL rights stripped from a section of society.

Replace LGBT with black people or Jews and see if you still feel sorry for him... If you do, maybe you need to take a long hard look in the mirror at yourself

I'm going to stop you there. I am Jewish, my sister is a lesbian, and before you say anything else, it's worth pointing out that by writing that post you proved my point; if you don't hold the CORRECT opinion, then people seem to think they have the right to discriminate and harass you because of it. Your argument is literally as follows:

OMG. YOU DON'T HATE THIS GUY SO MUCH THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE HIM RECIEVE DEATH THREATS AND HAVE HIS LIFE'S WORK STOLEN OFF HIM" BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YAY POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

I also have faith that in the grand scheme of things anybody would pass an act that would require me to wear an armband and stop doing what it is I do, irrespective of what one person happens to have financially supported. For his $1000 dollars, there have been at least hundreds of thousands financially put into campaigning for LGBT rights. It's a democracy. Somebody else can and SHOULD have a different opinion to you (because otherwise we are not human).

At no point did I agree with the guy; I think it's tragic that he fails to realise that people deserve equality, regardless of who they are.

"People deserve equality, regardless of who they are." There are two ways you can look at that, and I bet you only looked at the one that suits your anti-whoever-this-guy-is-called's case.

I feel somewhat sorry for him because he is not being allowed to have an opinion because YOU do not agree with him, and you are refusing to grant him equal rights and freedom of expression (which, when you think about it, is just a BIT ironic, no?)

So please, (and don't read this sarcastically or in a condescending tone of voice, because I really do mean it I'm not agreeing with the guy's beliefs, but I'm disagreeing with the idea that he should be harassed and threatened for not having your opinion.

 

[davislane1]

Are you an *****. The right to marry in most states. The right to inherit their partners assets upon death through intestacy. There are countless others.

1. A heterosexual is not restricted from marrying a member of the opposite sex in any state. A heterosexual IS restricted from marrying a member of the same sex in states that do not recognize same-sex marriage.

2. A homosexual is not restricted from marrying a member of the opposite sex in any state. A homosexual IS restricted from marrying a member of the same sex in states that do not recognize same-sex marriage.

3. Nothing prevents a hetero- or homosexual couple from writing up a legally binding contract conveying such an arrangement.

Demonstrate the inequality.

 

[cliffordcooley]

I honestly don't care what he does personally. Now if he makes a contribution in the name of Mozilla foundation, I would be asking everyone to do what okCupid is asking. As it is, I'm more inclined to ask people to stop using okCupid for making this pathetic request.

 

[Jad Chaar]

The comments are getting intense. Time to grab some popcorn.

 

[guyver1]

And here's another by the Oatmeal that is PERFECT!

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-...I/AAAAAAAAcTw/y1rSqY-fCog/w506-h675/photo.jpg

 

[Guest]

I will carry on using Firefox but now I will NEVER use okcupid.

 

[davislane1]

The right to marriage (depending on the country/state)
The right to adopt
The right to not be imprisoned or at worst killed for being of a sexual orientation that is illegal/abhorrent

Just a quick search:
http://76crimes.com/76-countries-where-homosexuality-is-illegal/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death/


If you don't see the parallels between the civil rights movement of black/coloured people of the 50's and 60's and the LGBT movement now, then you are either ignorant or just blind.

Ah, the "If you don't agree with me you're just dumb" argument. Well, color me a *****.

Firstly, there is no "right to adopt" anywhere in the United States Constitution. If you can find this right, I will change my forum signature to "Ignorant Stooge" for the duration of April. Secondly, gay marriage in the U.S. has nothing to do with what goes on in other countries. Homosexuals are not imprisoned for their sexuality or killed for it in this country, nor will they ever be for quite obvious reasons. Each of those links is utterly irrelevant.

The Civil Rights Movement is not the same thing as the LGBT movement. The two are not even remotely comparable. Or do we have special "no gays" zones in establishments, mass denial of employment on the basis of sexuality, or denial of entry into academic institutions on the basis of sexuality that I don't know about? Must be the best kept secret in town.

 

[guyver1]

You feel sorry for the guy?

He donated $1000 to a cause which would see EQUAL rights stripped from a section of society.

Replace LGBT with black people or Jews and see if you still feel sorry for him... If you do, maybe you need to take a long hard look in the mirror at yourself

I'm going to stop you there. I am Jewish, my sister is a lesbian, and before you say anything else, it's worth pointing out that by writing that post you proved my point; if you don't hold the CORRECT opinion, then people seem to think they have the right to discriminate and harass you because of it. Your argument is literally as follows:

OMG. YOU DON'T HATE THIS GUY SO MUCH THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE HIM RECIEVE DEATH THREATS AND HAVE HIS LIFE'S WORK STOLEN OFF HIM" BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YAY POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

I also have faith that in the grand scheme of things anybody would pass an act that would require me to wear an armband and stop doing what it is I do, irrespective of what one person happens to have financially supported. For his $1000 dollars, there have been at least hundreds of thousands financially put into campaigning for LGBT rights. It's a democracy. Somebody else can and SHOULD have a different opinion to you (because otherwise we are not human).

At no point did I agree with the guy; I think it's tragic that he fails to realise that people deserve equality, regardless of who they are.

"People deserve equality, regardless of who they are." There are two ways you can look at that, and I bet you only looked at the one that suits your anti-whoever-this-guy-is-called's case.

I feel somewhat sorry for him because he is not being allowed to have an opinion because YOU do not agree with him, and you are refusing to grant him equal rights and freedom of expression (which, when you think about it, is just a BIT ironic, no?)

So please, (and don't read this sarcastically or in a condescending tone of voice, because I really do mean it I'm not agreeing with the guy's beliefs, but I'm disagreeing with the idea that he should be harassed and threatened for not having your opinion.

1. Calling someone out on something is NOT discrimination and harassment.
2. I will STRONGLY disagree with your opinion, but I will defend to the death your right to that opinion.
3. He IS allowed to have an opinion and express it. He does not have the 'right' to NOT get called out on it and have his position as a CEO of a company that statistically employs LGBT people called in to questioned. Mozilla, nor any other company sits 'outside' reality in some bubble. His actions as CEO DO have an affect on the rest of the world around him. Its a fallacy to somehow think that what he does outside 'work' wont have an impact when he is in work.
If he decided to donate $1000 to Klu Klux Klan I doubt his position would be as 'steady' as it is now. (Imagine this scenario in 1950)

 

[guyver1]

LGBT Rights in the USA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States

 

[davislane1]

LGBT Rights in the USA - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_United_States

I assume there's some portion of that page you're meaning to reference?

 

[guyver1]

I assume there's some portion of that page you're meaning to reference?

No, its all relevant if you're genuinely interest in equality, as are all the other links I posted

 

[guyver1]

The typical 'harassment' argument - http://leiterreports.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c2e6353ef015432ab0c0f970c-pi

 

[Darth Shiv]

3. Nothing prevents a hetero- or homosexual couple from writing up a legally binding contract conveying such an arrangement.

Demonstrate the inequality.

A contract does *NOT* have the same legal standing as state or federal law for a start. Any contract you write is possibly void or can be challenged. State or Fed law protection enshrines basic legalality.

Besides, marriage does *not* belong to Christianity or Islam. It pre-existed BOTH. In ancient civilisations, homosexual unions were allowed. There was a backward step in societal equality.

Time for equality to return.

 

[guyver1]

Ah, the "If you don't agree with me you're just dumb" argument. Well, color me a *****.

Firstly, there is no "right to adopt" anywhere in the United States Constitution. If you can find this right, I will change my forum signature to "Ignorant Stooge" for the duration of April. Secondly, gay marriage in the U.S. has nothing to do with what goes on in other countries. Homosexuals are not imprisoned for their sexuality or killed for it in this country, nor will they ever be for quite obvious reasons. Each of those links is utterly irrelevant.

The Civil Rights Movement is not the same thing as the LGBT movement. The two are not even remotely comparable. Or do we have special "no gays" zones in establishments, mass denial of employment on the basis of sexuality, or denial of entry into academic institutions on the basis of sexuality that I don't know about? Must be the best kept secret in town.

The typical American response that somehow this an 'American' issue.
Just like the civil rights movement, this is a GLOBAL issue, not just a 'mericun issue that you foreigners need to stay the hell out of coz you know, you know jack about our country!!

Mozilla is a GLOBAL company too before you start some rabid defense that Mozilla is a 'mericun company - http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contact/communities/