Governor makes parodies of you. And people on Slashdot were just talking about how much more free the US is than Russia. Looks like we can't even criticize our govt anymore.

No such thing as an "anonymous whistle-blower", we know this for the precise reason that Snowden blew the whistle. The only way that even would make sense is if you didn't know about the NSA. You need to pay more attention.

Except the US has done that, is in the process of doing it again,and seeing as how you and most others don't even care to know, will also likely continue to do it even more often in the future.

It very well could. The court decisions in America are just some guy making a decision and then bashing a hammer to make it so. Many asshole judges have made much worse decisions than upholding some bullshit agreement like this. Just like most decisions made by a Judge, the decision as to whether or not the "agreement" will be upheld will be made before the case ever even goes to trial. It seems like you still think there is some such thing as "Justice" in this world, when it really only exists in fairy stories.

I thought conservative libertarians were supposed to support the "free market". The idea that if your employer is ripping you off then "it's a free country" and you can work elsewhere. Then they turn around and support things like non competes which if measured in "freedom units" would be much more tyrannical than a minimum wage or anti discrimination laws.

And spare me the "if you don't like it don't sign the contract" line of bs. If people were able to unionize there might be some way we could fight back against this crap on our own. The fact is a reasonable person has no way of getting assurance from his fellow tradesmen that there will be an organized strike on such agreements, so he signs it knowing that if he doesn't, someone else will.

If you think workers should have to get an different MBA/Doctorate for every job they choose to work I hope you and your entire extended family die in a bus accident.

Why do I get the feeling Slashdot is trolling me?

I'm sure that's what liberals would call a "false equivalence," you know, since the only people they consider equals are those lock n step with every single one of their views.

It doesn't. You can't form a strike because your boss participates in a Christian Church (likely where he was encouraged to make the donation) or is a very active Liberal Democrat. Pressure and coercion are the same thing, people claiming they're not are just trying to play semantics because they have no other leg to stand on. The thing Liberals don't understand that discrimination against someone for religious/political views is just as wrong as discriminating against someone for being gay or a being an ethnic Jew.

Maybe if Erich was part of some hate-group / borderline terrorist organization it would be okay, but we're talking about a law that was introduced and voted on by the Californian Govt. Excusing this sets a very awkward precedent. If an employer can choose to fire (strike, or force resignation) a person who supported Prop 8, what's to stop another employer from forcing someone who voted against Prop 8 for resigning. I thought Liberals were against voter ID laws for this very reason, I guess none of that logic applies when it's someone voting against their causes (ie: I can fire republican/religious persons but firing liberal activists etc is wrong).

There were many employees within Mozilla that were slandering his religious/political views and threatening to take action actions harmful to Mozilla (ie: quit) if he stayed on as CEO.

In California that is very clearly against the law

And if you think the smear campaign against him was "fair and balanced" (personally I think he should seek reparations from OK Cupid), because someone of his religious affiliation being the CEO of a company isn't "proper," that he should "know his place." Who's to say what's "proper." Since we're defining the ceiling of upward mobility of individuals based on religious/political affiliations, what is the "proper place" for a woman or transgender in society?

While there was no government action taken against Erich, is it really okay to publicly shame people for being different than others, for, in this case, his belief that children should have a mother? I don't agree with Prop 8, marriage inequality is wrong, but I think "children should have a mother" is a completely reasonable ideal for a person to hold. The fact that his actual political donation (whatever his opinion on homosexuality may be) has been and is STILL falsely spun to frame him as someone who took action to suppress homosexuals, to keep them from gaining equal rights speaks volumes about those that are supporting this action.

They permitted the hostile conditions that lead to his resign. It's no different than jobs I've had, being the only white guy at work and being forced to resign because there was a strong corporate culture of "no gringo" aka "kill all the white man." Libs are such hypocrites. A gay person is afforded protection because it isn't a "choice," but if you were born into a culture/religion and brainwashed from a young age to believe that "children need a mother" (the issue donated to), which is completely 100% not a choice (if you think it is you understand brainwashing/indoctrination about as much as a homophobe understands homosexuality), then you shouldn't be allowed a means of providing yourself an income. But yeah, it's the people who don't think politics should be a deciding factor in employment (ie: we only employ republicans/democrats) that are the "bigots." smh

So what you're saying is, if Mozilla's customer base were "rednecks", and they were uninstalling Firefox because he was gay, that he should have been forced to resign for being gay? Or do only gays/liberals have the right to "speak their minds in opposition" of something, pretty sure that's all he was doing. Really, who has the double standard here?

PS: Personally I think he did the right thing, I think he should have resigned and I don't think anyone at Mozilla should be held criminally at fault. I do however take issue with Cupid running a smear campaign on the guy based on his political affiliations. I don't even agree with his political views, I'm just a guy who lives in the south that has lost jobs for being a Democrat and sometimes (as in not often) listening to "black music", I know how it feels.

Then again, to a neo Libreal anyone who isn't willing to give away half their paycheck so the impoverished can pop out 8 kids and watch Jerry Springier all day is a "NAZI sympathizer".

A stone age baby would be 4ft tall and have more likelihood of having a debilitating genetic disorder than not. If you don't think things like immunity to disease and dietary patterns or even social structures have an effect on evolution then you haven't a clue what evolution is, and you should quit spreading misinformation as if you are some kind of expert on it. As for "kid's quoting "Mien Kaumph", I don't believe anybody is talking about the Aryian race here. Care to point out who was declaring the white man to be the supreme race? The only person being quoted was Charls Darwin, who's literary works were twisted into a form of propaganda by Hitler and the NAZI party. It's like calling calling Democrats a bunch of Stalinists because they often quotes Orwell, who was somewhat influenced by Marx.

Actually, they're speaking views exactly in line with their fearless/glorious leaders Richard Stallman and Linus Torvalds. According to them you shouldn't buy any proprietary software because it should not exist, at all. They do not believe people should be even given the option of choosing free software; closed software should be illegal/banned and they tell people that they should be ashamed of themselves for using it. Just go to gnu.org and you can read Stallman's rants. You can see this reflected in the GPL licenses as well, aka "copyleft" licenses which are impossible to apply to a "software as a product" business model, only "software as a service."

Stallman is so far to the left that he doesn't even believe a person should be able to attach their name to a piece of their mathematical contributions / artwork, evident in his condemnation of the original BSD license. No, the only thing he believes code can have attached to it is the GNU public license, which people will see and associate with his name/movement and not the original creator/author-- just like any other tyrannical megalomaniac you read about in history.