As of right now, that wonderful browser Firefox has been uninstalled from all machines in my office, and good riddance. Mozilla’s CEO, Brendan Eich, was forced out of Mozilla solely because of his belief in traditional marriage. The headlines read that he was forced to resign after a firestorm of controversy due to his support of the “anti-gay” ballot measure in California. Proposition 8 was passed in 2008 making same-sex marriage unrecognized with 52% of the vote, but was overturned (in effect) by the Supreme Court in 2013. The proposition added a new section in the California Constitution to read “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” It was not intended to be “anti-gay” as opponents called it, but intended to recognize the uniqueness of the male and female bond, particularly the ability to procreate naturally and raise a family. I believe sincere people can disagree on this issue, but no one should have to lose their job in a world that is supposedly driving towards “diversity” and “tolerance.”
An article at the website “The Verge” provides a good summary of the events that led up to Eich’s resignation, but it was riddled with hypocrisy, and demonstrated that the entire diversity and tolerance movement is little more than a sham. It doesn’t apply equally to all, and isn’t that supposed to be the very idea? The article states that “Eich found little public support for his argument that he could uphold Mozilla’s commitment to equality at work while funding discrimination at home.” Eich’s belief in traditional marriage is not discrimination, but it is a sincerely held Christian belief that I also hold. Christianity has been around for 2,000 years, and the Jewish history on which it is based on goes back at least 4,000 years. So if Eich accepts the Judeo-Christian view on marriage, how was he discriminating? He didn’t make Christianity up himself, and last I checked Christian teachings have not changed one whit in 2,000 years. So is the point of this article that Christians are not included when it comes to diversity and tolerance? It appears that this is the case, and that is what is so chilling. I am sincerely afraid.
The article goes on to say that Eich’s view was growing “out of step” with his fellow Americans. But if he is following a sincere religious belief shared by almost all of the two billion Christians on earth, is he supposed to follow that or follow what most Americans think? If all Americans think as the article believes they should, where is the diversity of views? Where is the tolerance of Eich’s views? And since when did it become necessarily the case that because Eich believed in traditional marriage that he would discriminate against gay employees? I expect he is a man who, after a lengthy search was made CEO, would have been seen as a man of outstanding leadership and character who would treat all employees with dignity and respect. There is no reason to believe otherwise. The article refers to Obama’s sudden change from being opposed to same-sex marriage based on his Christian faith, to supporting it. Christianity didn’t change, so if his position was based on his Christian faith, then what is it based on now? We can see that Obama folded for political expediency, but Eich held to his faith and position.
It is clear that the diversity and tolerance movement only applies to those who believe a certain way. They don’t want diversity of thought, but one way of thought, and if you don’t think that way, then they will do everything they can to silence your views. It’s not about tolerance, because the definition of tolerance is putting up with someone or something you don’t agree with. So the diversity and tolerance movement won’t tolerate people who don’t think like them. And it is clear that the primary target is those who hold Christian beliefs. It is chilling to the core, and the very people behind this movement couldn’t be more hypocritical and self-serving. Is this the new America? Will America accept a movement whose very operation is antithetical to its very name? It appears this is the trend, and I am more than certain that a movement wholly inconsistent with its mission cannot be a worthy one. All Christians should be afraid, very afraid, of this modern day persecution.
Comments on this entry are closed.