Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:The double standard at work (Score 1) 824

The Declaration of Independence is a fine document, but it isn't the Constitution, and it is the Constitution that constitutes the foundation of government. Sadly the Constitution as adopted allowed for slavery. If it hadn't it would not have passed at the time since various colonies had slavery as an institution bequeathed to them by their European founders. However the spirit of the Declaration of Independence won out in the end.

Comment Re:I'd rather not be fired for my beliefs (Score 1) 824

He was promoted from inside the company, and they feel that he shouldn't have been.

If he was promoted from inside the company it was because of his job performance. His detractors oppose him because of something he did that wasn't work related, on his own time.

Oh, and if you don't want your political contributions to become a big deal in the workplace, I have a couple recommendations: ... The policies of a new CEO are assumed, with reason, to be the intended policies of the company.

That is BS. The political contribution he made were personal, unrelated to the company. Nobody could reasonably confuse the two - his personal contributions and what the company policy was. If he had Mozilla make contributions as a corporate entity that is a different question.

A few thousand dollars publicly and visibly donated to a very controversial, discriminatory cause? Well, that's going to grab some attention. It still won't make headlines though, unless people have reason to believe you're in a position to discriminate against others going forward. See #1...

In other words, people should only contribute to the causes that you personally approve of. Besides that, company officers aren't government officials.

If you really want that to stick that could be bad news for a lot of companies. Apple, for example, has a gay CEO. Should Apple then be boycotted?

Comment Re:The double standard at work (Score 1) 824

In the case of slavery you are removing the right of the slave owners and giving new rights to the slave so it isn't that simple. Also, slavery actually isn't a question of skin color but of legal status. There were white slaves, and sentencing one to slavery was an available legal punishment in the judicial system in various places in the US.

Gay people already literally did have the same rights as other people, and they aren't happy about that. They want something different.

Comment Re:The double standard at work (Score 0) 824

It's pretty obvious. In the future, people opposed to gay rights today are going to be seen similarly to those who fought against civil rights in the 60s.

You didn't mention which "60s" you're referring to, the 1860s or the 1960s. I have little doubt you're thinking of the 1960s, but the future is an uncertain thing. They may be seen like the people in the 1850s and 1860s that opposed the right of other Americans to own slaves, a right reflected in the Constitution itself, opposing a right that was popular in some areas but ultimately a bad idea. When you're referring to "prejudice," make sure to consider your own.

Slashdot Top Deals

Mathematics is the only science where one never knows what one is talking about nor whether what is said is true. -- Russell