Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Firefox Software News

OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights 1482

Posted by Soulskill
from the unwelcoming-is-unwelcome dept.
PortWineBoy writes: "The Beeb is reporting that OkCupid is prompting Mozilla Firefox users to switch browsers over Brendan Eich's support of Prop 8 in California in 2008. Users are met with a message stating that OKCupid would prefer no one access their site with Mozilla software. Eich is the new CEO of Mozilla."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

OKCupid Warns Off Mozilla Firefox Users Over Gay Rights

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:41PM (#46632227)

    Yes. I went there.

  • by rossdee (243626) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:41PM (#46632231)

    I look forward to the 2nd or April

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Altus (1034)

      Not an april fools story, this one is real.

      • That's Slashdot's angle this year. Post studies that seem too stupid to be true but actually are. What better way to fool everyone? :-D
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Seems to me, OKCupid trying to boycott a perfectly good company and product over a single person's political views, is grounds for boycotting OKCupid.

        Stupidity abounds. This is a grand example of the INtolerance of opposing views we have been seeing since Obama took office. (I'm not blaming him, just pointing out the approximate timing.)
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by lgw (121541)

          Intolerance abounds these days under the theme of "shouting down bigotry". People blithely unaware they're acting much the same as those who opposed civil rights laws in the first place.

          In this specific case, however, eHarmony is perfect for anyone offended by OKCupid's behavior, given their own history here. Heck, this could improve the utility of both dating services by filtering up front on this issue.

          • by poopdeville (841677) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @05:39PM (#46634313)

            People blithely unaware they're acting much the same as those who opposed civil rights laws in the first place.

            Yes, except for the fact that they aren't lynching niggers.

          • by AmiMoJo (196126) * <mojo@@@world3...net> on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @06:03PM (#46634497) Homepage

            There's nothing wrong with not tolerating bigotry. If someone believes something stupid or morally objectionable and spends money trying to deprive a group of people of their rights because of their sexuality, it's perfectly fine to criticise them.

            The key difference is that gay people can't help being gay, any more than black people can help being black or women can help being women. They guy's view is something he decided on himself, something he could easily change, something he chooses to believe.

          • by TsuruchiBrian (2731979) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @07:02PM (#46634963)

            Shouting down bigotry is the best way to deal with bigotry. It doesn't violate anyone's rights. Laws which deny people equal protection under the law actually do violate people's rights.

            So yes shouting down bigotry and opposing civil rights are the same thing in the sense that they are both shouting, except that one is shouting in support of bigotry and the other in opposition to it, which is in my view, a big enough of a difference to make supporting one and not the other perfectly reasonable.

            To me this is like claiming that the slavery abolitionists were just as intolerant as the slave owners because they were intolerant of slavery. Yes you can look at it this way, but I don't think it serves any real purpose other than to confuse the issue.

            I don't think it's profound at all to claim that those opposed to intolerance are intolerant of intolerance. This just seems like an obvious and necessary exception to the concept of intolerance.

        • by N0Man74 (1620447) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @03:46PM (#46633031)

          I'm sorry, but I am intolerant of your intolerance toward intolerance.

          Thinking one group of people is subhuman, and not worthy of the same rights isn't "an opposing view", it's bigotry.

          According to the Right, liberals are racists, because they are the only ones who talk about race issues. Apparently liberals are also the intolerant ones, because they are concerned about intolerance.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:42PM (#46632247)

    But making a stand against someone because of their religious beliefs seems petty... and I'm an Athiest...
    what happened to live and let live?

    • by jythie (914043) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:48PM (#46632303)
      In this case at least, it is due to the new CEO not adhering to 'live and let live'. Gay rights activists rarely care about people's personal religious beliefs, it is when they put resources into having those beliefs enshrined in law and thus using state power to force their religion on others that people get annoyed.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        So you can believe anything you want; but you cannot act on it? That's downright religious of you... Imagine if someone said, "Hey, its cool if you're gay and all, just don't act on it".

        • by jythie (914043) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @03:16PM (#46632659)
          Well, if your action impacts other people (when trying to pass laws requiring others to take the same actions), esp ones who are not part of your faith, yeah, you are going to get called out on it.
    • by x0ra (1249540) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:51PM (#46632333)
      Religious belief is one thing, forcing that belief upon other by supporting (or not) a policy change that would ostracize a non trivial part of the population is another.
    • by sjames (1099) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @03:15PM (#46632637) Homepage

      It's not about beliefs here. It's about what he tried to do because of them. I can assume you would have no problem working for a Christian, but how might you feel about one who was actively campaigning to make Sunday church attendance mandatory for everyone? Would you care to support his endeavor even indirectly?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:47PM (#46632295)

    OK Cupid is in the process of getting rid of all Javascript on the site, since Brendan Eich was the creator of that too. All interactive content will be replaced with the more LGBT-friendly Adobe Flash.

  • by SuperKendall (25149) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:49PM (#46632311)

    I'm fully in support of gay marriage, and have been to a few same-sex ceremonies for friends.

    But in no way do I support the demonization or boycott of people just because they have a different opinion of something than I do. To me that's a for of bigotry itself, and why would I want to be bigoted?

    I'm pretty sure that there are almost no two people on earth who have the same opinion on every single subject. If we go down this road of shunning those who think differently, we all wind up as islands - and not the fun kind with umbrellas in in drinks, for we will have shunned all of the umbrella makers...

    • by devent (1627873)

      It was not just his opinion. Eich donated good money for a law that would discriminate a minority. Even if Eich did not donated, but just wrote in some private blog "gay people should be discriminated by the state of California", that makes him a bigot and a not acceptable behaviour in a civilized democratic country. To call out on him is the minimum what people should do.

      Sure, he have his right to voice his opinion. But people have also their right to call out on him for his bigotry. Sounds like you just l

    • But in no way do I support the demonization or boycott of people just because they have a different opinion of something than I do. And how else do you fight them in a civilized way? Shoting them? Igniting riots against them?
      Those idiots 'believe' they are right and base their live decissions on it. There needs to be a public way to show them how wrong they are. A call for boycott is the easiest and cheap and pretty civilized.

  • by abies (607076) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:49PM (#46632313)

    Want to get unpaid product placement on BBC? Boycott Mozilla! I suppose that not watching Ender's Game is already not enough.
    News for tomorrow: Kazakhstan Airlines cancel flights to Vatican quoting lack of official support for gay priests from the Pope.

  • Terrible precedent (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JDG1980 (2438906) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:51PM (#46632325)

    So we're politicizing browser selection now? This amounts to dragging end users into a political dispute that they have nothing to do with. Is this really a road we want to go down? How long before people start blocking IE because they don't like Microsoft's business tactics, or before Apple starts blocking Google Chrome users with a message complaining about alleged patent infringement?

    Once this Pandora's box is open, it will be impossible to close. This time it may be aimed at Brendan Eich for the heinous crime of holding onto outdated views of gay marriage a whole two years longer than President Obama, but next time it could be anyone.

  • by DoofusOfDeath (636671) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:51PM (#46632331)

    There's an important point that I think is often lost in these discussions. Orthodox Christian theology maintains several points: (1) Homosexuality is a sin, (2) unrepentant sin goes hand-in-hand with alienation from God, and (3) alienation from God leads to both unhappiness in this present life and a missed opportunity for happiness after death.

    Based on that set of axioms, it can be completely loving to encourage someone to repent of his sins and choose to follow Jesus. Practicing homosexuality is a sign that someone isn't doing that. It would therefore be unloving or even hateful to affirm homosexual relations.

    Now I'm sure 90% of the Slashdot crowd disagrees with those axioms. And it's certainly the case that a person can proclaim to be Christian but actually hate gay people. But there are some Christians for whom that's not the case, and I don't think any of us knows Mozilla's CEO well enough to guess in which group he sits.

    • It should be noted that there are also Christians who look at what Jesus had to say on the subject (basically, nothing), and don't worry about it too much. Note that the Old Testament is an interesting historical document, but it's not what Christianity is all about. In spite of the noise made about it by Atheists and Christians alike.

      Plus the Lutherans who look at what Martin Luther had to say on the subject of marriage (it's the government's business who can marry whom and when, not the Church's (thou

  • Oh, ok... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Charliemopps (1157495) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:52PM (#46632339)

    So it'd be alright if Firefox plastered over every page of sites that didn't support prop8 that they were supporting immoral and disgusting behavior? We have the right to free thought and expression in this country, even if you don't like it.

    • They'd be perfectly within their rights, just as OKCupid is. Or would you rather OKCupid refrain from expressing themselves on their own website, just because you don't like it? :)

  • Boycott California (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SpaceManFlip (2720507) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:53PM (#46632361)
    If the torch & pitchfork crowds are going after this dude now because he supported CA Prop 8, shouldn't they also call for a boycott of the state of California? You know, since a majority of their voters voted for the infamous Proposition 8 and passed it. I would say that voting for it counts as supporting it, right?
  • Dear Slacktivists (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hsmith (818216) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:54PM (#46632369)
    Fuck off and die.

    This whole internet activism bullshit has gotten out of hand. Hey, stop using JavaScript if you want to put your money where your mouth is.

    Not using Firefox will change nothing.

    KONY2014
  • Not a joke (Score:5, Interesting)

    by devent (1627873) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:55PM (#46632379) Homepage

    Not April's day joke. But a little bit misrepresentation. Prop 8. was about recognition of marriage by the state of California, it was not about whether or not same-sex marriage is legal or illegal. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Eich wants gay-couples to be outlawed.

    From https://www.okcupid.com/ [okcupid.com]

    Hello there, Mozilla Firefox user. Pardon this interruption of your OkCupid experience.

    Mozilla’s new CEO, Brendan Eich, is an opponent of equal rights for gay couples. We would therefore prefer that our users not use Mozilla software to access OkCupid.

    Politics is normally not the business of a website, and we all know there’s a lot more wrong with the world than misguided CEOs. So you might wonder why we’re asserting ourselves today. This is why: we’ve devoted the last ten years to bringing people—all people—together. If individuals like Mr. Eich had their way, then roughly 8% of the relationships we’ve worked so hard to bring about would be illegal. Equality for gay relationships is personally important to many of us here at OkCupid. But it’s professionally important to the entire company. OkCupid is for creating love. Those who seek to deny love and instead enforce misery, shame, and frustration are our enemies, and we wish them nothing but failure.

    If you want to keep using Firefox, the link at the bottom will take you through to the site.

    However, we urge you to consider different software for accessing OkCupid:

    Google Chrome Internet Exploder Opera

  • by steak (145650) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:56PM (#46632389) Homepage Journal

    It's funny how they are principled enough to boycott the company he is steering, but not principled enough to stop using the thing that he is credited with inventing.

  • by Anonymous Psychopath (18031) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:56PM (#46632399) Homepage

    If he opposed Prop 8 he would have been in support of gay marriage, not opposed to it. Prop 8 was a California constitutional amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman. I assume he was in support of Prop 8 and not opposed to it as indicated in the summary.

  • by RevWaldo (1186281) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:57PM (#46632403)
    Google at last count provides 90% of Mozilla's revenue - http://thenextweb.com/insider/... [thenextweb.com]

    Boycott Firefox AND Chrome! Long live Lynx!

    .
  • Irony (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dega704 (1454673) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @02:59PM (#46632443)
    People's attitudes on this are extremely hypocritical. We rail against hatred and discrimination, and yet here we are with a "BURN THE HEATHENS!" mob mentality the second we find out about someone donating a relatively measly $1000 to Prop8. With the way some people are acting, you would think we just discovered that the guy was a raging pedophile. Did he really give out anywhere near the amount of damage that he and Mozilla are now receiving? Is this how we win the battle against discrimination? By replacing one form of irrational hatred and bias with another? We may view it as poetic justice, but it's hypocrisy; plain and simple. People love to hate. The only thing that ever changes is who the current easy target is. Plenty of CEOs are vile, unscrupulous pigs who cheat on their wives and sexually harass female employees, but you won't see this sort of backlash against them because it isn't the current political hot topic.
    • Re:Irony (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Dixie_Flatline (5077) <vincent,jan,goh&gmail,com> on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @03:55PM (#46633159) Homepage

      This is a completely false equivalence.

      OKC asked people to consider stopping using Firefox as long as Eich is the CEO. They haven't asked people to attempt to have Eich's marriage annulled, put money into a fund to pass laws that abrogate his fundamental human rights, or indeed to take any action against him at all.

      I don't see why racists and homophobes shouldn't be called to account for the things they do and the things they support. He supported a law that in the end was unconstitutional--by definition, the thing he supported was against the rights that these people hold. It's not hypocritical to ask people to denounce inequality unless what you're proposing is a NEW KIND of inequality. Saying that you should think twice about using the product from a company that is run by someone with identifiably questionable positions on human equality isn't taking anything away from him other than his hopes that this will blow over quietly without notice.

      And there's a way out for him, certainly. Admit that what he did was wrong, and contribute $1000 to marriage equality in some other state. Done.

      I have no sympathy for racists or xenophobes. I live in Quebec, and right now an entire election hinges significantly on one party's desire to codify discrimination against religious groups. They've admitted that they'd use the Notwithstanding Clause--a clause built into the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that allows a province to override fundamental protections for five years--which is a tacit admission that what they're doing is deliberately holding groups of people down. It's dirty and disgusting and I want nothing to do with it.

      If it's hateful of me to believe in the rights of other people, well, there's no hope for any of us.

  • If OKCupid is really that against FF as a browser, block the useragent string. Then I'll believe they really want to take a stand.

    Also, as the FF CEO also created Javascript, get rid of that on the site.

  • by Carnivore24 (467239) <brianshoNO@SPAMcomcast.net> on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @03:06PM (#46632515)
    I'm confused. Should I keep watching Duck Dynasty and Honey Boo Boo? Where should I eat? Is it ok to eat at Taco Bell and Subway still?
  • From Okay Cupid... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bdwoolman (561635) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @03:17PM (#46632673) Homepage
    ...To Okay Stupid. This requested boycott is a cynical media troll that plays on people's lowest impulses. I doubt this gutter play buys Stupid Cupid much goodwill just some media attention. Besides, Eich has stated that he supports a diverse workplace. And a lot of people have evolved on this issue over the years.
  • McCarthy Jr. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mr_Wisenheimer (3534031) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @03:37PM (#46632925)

    California is a State that recognizes that people have a legal right to participate in lawful activities outside of work without consequence to their job. I voted against Proposition 8 and I am disappointed in everyone who supported it, but people have a right to their private lives and their religious freedom.

    If the company, Mozilla, were discriminating in any way against employees or customers because of their sexual orientation, then taking them to task would be appropriate and ethical. However, hounding a private citizen at work is not ethical. Imagine if someone read the blog post of a pro same-sex marriage activist and got 1000 of their Christian friends to bombard the activist's place of employment with thousands of phone calls and dozens of angry citizens trying to gain access to the premises and talk to the employer about their employee's "immoral" behavior.

    It is not McCarthyism, but it is the same sort of attitude, ruin the professional lives of all your perceived political opponents. While only a tiny sliver of proposition 8 opponents engaged in this sort of behavior, it does nothing but a disservice to their cause. When conservative Christians talk about being persecuted by homosexuals for their beliefs, most people rightfully laugh in their face, but actions like this do lead an iota of credibility to their claims, and we all know that anecdotes of someone claiming to have been forced to quit their job because of harassment from "homosexual activists" speak a lot more convincingly to many people than the millions of proposition 8 supporters who were not harassed.

    The bottom line is understanding the difference between tolerance and acceptance. I tolerate a lot of bad behavior and stupid ideas because I am a tolerant person. When you go to work or school, you are required by law (at least here in California) to tolerate the beliefs of your coworkers, those who believe that same-sex couples should wed and those who are religiously opposed to the idea. You do not have to accept their beliefs, just tolerate them and their rights to them.

    Acceptance of same-sex marriages is something that should flow naturally out of tolerance, not something that activists should try to force on people. As it becomes legal in more States and acquires more popular support, those who do not accept it will tend to die off or change their mind. You are never going to get 100% acceptance and harassing people in their workplace for what they believe in their personal life is not doing the same sex marriage cause any justice or service.

  • This just in... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SeaFox (739806) on Tuesday April 01, 2014 @04:10PM (#46633393)

    Companies are made up of many, many people and some of them may have disagreeing opinions. And people are not the company.

    OKCupid is only providing support for the idea an employer has a right to control their workers personal lives when they're off the clock, and being wage or salary has nothing to do with it, as folks here like to drag into the situation. Even if I'm a salaried worker I'm not "at work" 24/7. I have specific hours I'm doing my job, and hours I'm not. We are human beings and have our own opinions on issues, sometimes unpopular opinions. If you don't like the ideas of a single person you have an issue with the human, not the company. There's no reason to take any action against Mozilla just because you don't like their new CEO. Now, if his personal beliefs begin to shape corporate policy or find their way into product design, then you have an issue with Mozilla the company.

  • by enter to exit (1049190) on Wednesday April 02, 2014 @01:58AM (#46636871)
    The CEO of a company, and anyone in general, has a right to influence the society he lives in and how his government makes laws. He can do what he wishes with his money.

    He should not be punished for taking part in the democratic process, he shouldn't be silenced, he should be outvoted. So, if you care enough, you need to become politically active. Boycotting things amounts to mob rule, it works the same way repression works.

    The CEO of Mozilla doesn't own Mozilla, nor was he using it to influence his worldview. He's essentially an employee

    OKCupid is leveraging it's own brand and Mozilla's to benefit itself and real losers are gays who let themselves be taken cynically taken advantage of.

    Corporations don't have opinions, they only reflect those of it's customers. Where was the Rainbow Oreo [theguardian.com] in the 80's and 90's when gay rights was a divisive issue? Why didn't Oreo have an opinion then? These kinds of corporations only support the winning side of the culture wars. As we saw with Duck Dynasy and Cracker Barrel [forbes.com], if enough people complain, the company will unashamedly backflip. It's purely business, not ideological.

It is better to give than to lend, and it costs about the same.

Working...