You do. Just don't think you're any better than them, or that your speech is any "freer" than theirs.

But this affair isn't a matter of free speech. This is a matter of persecution. This is the mob forcing someone from their job when they've done nothing wrong professionally (Javascript notwithstanding).

You're naming politicians here. It's not helping your argument.

Being bigoted towards a bigot is still bigotry.

And yet, he has not had the opportunity to do any of these things before he was forced out. In fact, he's stated that nothing would change about Mozilla's stance towards the LGBT community and its issues. Yet he was judged not by his ability nor his performance, but by his beliefs. How is that not being bigoted?

If OkCupid was actually doing more than just attention-seeking, they would've boycotted Javascript (and put up banners for JS-enabled browsers to tell their users to disable JS). And I'll bet a fair amount of people here develop in and/or work closesly with Javascript.

Anybody, especially organizations, who advocated for Eich to step down should boycott JS too, if they truly believe their own righteousness. Don't see that happening anywhere...

You seem to have fail at separating personal from professional.

It has everything to do with his personal beliefs.

If he had fired a bunch of LGBT-supporting employees at Mozilla, or defunded the LGBT club (if they have one) there, that would be crossing the line between personal and professional. Only then would all this outrage be justified.

Did he do anything like this during his short tenure? I certainly haven't heard.

You're thinking of a 1st amendment issue regardinig the government. Free Speech exists above anything written on a piece of paper.

You sure you really want to go there? Javascript is one of the worst things to happen to web browsers. Based on that alone, he probably shouldn't qualify to be the CEO of a company writing browsers.

But this argument just wouldn't appeal to the primitive tribal emotions the way that a left vs. right., liberal vs. conservative angle does, now would it? In fact, it might even be *shudder* logical.

Absolutely correct. But those latter people probably should get off their high horse, since they're no better than the individual they're deriding. And by getting off their high horse, I mean these people should recognize, and should be recognized for the hypocrites that they are in speaking on the issue.

Advocating for a boycott of a company for one employee's beliefs is just as "right" as donating money to an anti-same-sex marriage cause. They're both free speech, and they're both just as ugly.

That's a bad analogy. The proper analogy would be if an employee of a local non-profit art museum advocates for the ban of smoking, you'd boycott going to the museum and raise hell until said employee resigned. Or perhaps even not just any employee, but one on the board of trustees.

Public pressure managed to ruin a man's professional career due to his personal beliefs. McCarthy would be proud indeed.

And even better, he wouldn't have had to lift a finger today to get the same results.

How's that better than choosing to not come out because a cross-section of society will persecute you?

For all the "progress" society has supposedly made, this entire affair shows it's still the same bullshit, just pointed in the other direction now.

We're having trouble teaching people even the most basic things like arithmetic. What makes you think there's any hope for a complex skill like driving?

Make the road test harder. Right now, even the hardest tests are fairly easy, and their difficulty is mostly in knowing and following all of the "rules" that a normal driver usually wouldn't bother with. That needs to be done away with. A road test should measure aptitude on the road, not how well one follows rules written on a piece of paper.

Require a highway portion. Require a reverse-driving portion that's more than the K-turn. Require driving in rain (and snow) conditions. Commercial drivers have a much harder test. Their skill is noticeable. That's the test everyone should be taking as their normal road test.

Also, require a retest once every ten years.

Sorry, but most of the "people" being run over in this manner are kids who just ran out of the house to say goodbye to daddy or mommy.

And then, there are the idiot drivers who don't even bother looking backwards before backing up. Then when they hit someone, they hit the gas instead of the brakes and call it a brake fault. No camera is going to prevent that kinda of recklessness.