The Mozilla Corporation is the company most popularly behind the Firefox web browser. What in the world do the personal political opinions of the CEO of that company have to do with the company itself and the products they purvey? Nothing.
And what was it that liberals said in defending Slick Willie and his many escapades with Monica Lewinsky? They said that his personal sexual relationships should remain private; that what he does in his bedroom (or Oval Office) is his personal business and no one else’s; that his decision to commit adultery had no bearing on his abilities to run the country.
But hey, we’re not dealing with the president of an entire country here. We’re dealing with someone who was CEO of a private company. In that case, it’s far more important to rat out those homophobic bigots trying to lead the company than it is to rat out someone who was entrusted to be faithful to his country while being profoundly unfaithful to his wife.
They’ve pulled the race card out again, this time courtesy of Jim Edwards, one of the editors over at BusinessInsider.com. Here’s Edwards during an interview on BBC World Service’s World Have Your Say:
“[T]his is a guy who is the head of the Firefox browser – conceivably would meet Apple CEO Tim Cook [a homosexual] – Tim Cook being the head of the most important tech company on the planet probably. These two guys are in a room: one of them believes he has more rights than the other, and that the other guy has fewer human rights than he does. How is Tim Cook supposed to react to that? How is he supposed to deal with that? That’s crazy. An analogy would be – you know, if this guy had donated some money to the KKK, and was then meeting with a company run by a black CEO. It’s just – it’s beyond the pale. Once you are donating money that strip people of their civil rights, you have stepped beyond the pale.” [Emphasis Matthew Balan’s of Newsbusters]
Later in the discussion, Will Oremus of Slate Magazine and Kathleen McKinley chimed in. Edwards went all in with the “traditional marriage equals black slavery” response:
OREMUS: No, I’m sorry – being able – being able to marry anyone you want is a civil right. Being able to be CEO of Mozilla is not a civil right.
MCKINLEY: Being able to give a political donation without being targeted and harassed and witch-hunted is also a civil right.
EDWARDS: What if Brendan Eich’s position had been, I want the civil right to own slaves? Would he still – would that be okay, because it’s just his opinion, right?…It’s his opinion, and he wants the right to own slaves. Is that all right?
This has been said many times, but it’s worth repeating. Homosexuals have as much “right” to get married as heterosexuals do. What they don’t seem to get is that what they want is not marriage. What these virulent homosexuals want is for the entire world to bow down to them and praise them for their lifestyle; to put them on a pedestal and tell them that their sexual practices are beautiful and natural. Anything short of that (even tolerance) is considered hateful and bigoted.