If you want to see how unaware and self-absorbed liberals are, take a look at Mark Joseph Stern’s “The Astonishing Conservative Hypocrisy Over Mozilla And The First Amendment” at Slate. I’ll skip to the heart of the matter first:
Oddly, however, I don’t see defenders of Eich also criticizing the Boy Scouts for excluding gay men because the organization disagrees with their conduct and beliefs. Nor do I even see conservatives taking Mozilla’s rights as a private corporation seriously—a predictable hypocrisy made especially obnoxious in light of last week’s widespread right-wing praise of the corporate plaintiff’s claim in Hobby Lobby. This is the conservative double standard in the realm of corporate rights: When the corporation supports a right-wing pet project—say, denying women reproductive care—conservatives pen encomia to the First Amendment’s corporate protections. But when a corporation dares to support a progressive cause like gay rights, conservatives cry foul at its alleged censorship of individual views.
So Stern thinks he has two parallel cases for forcing a man to resign because he gave money to a political cause: 1. A refusal to allow self-identified homosexual men in a private organizations to serve as teachers and, at times, guardians of young boys, and 2. A belief that the government cannot force people to fund abortions.
These are apples and orangutans.
The parallel to firing a man for contributing money to a political cause is firing a man for contributing money to the other side of that political cause. No, this has nothing to do with the First Amendment (or shouldn’t). But the fact is that Christians and other “traditionalists” (going all the way back to 2012 before the President “changed his mind” on the issue) work with male and female homosexuals all the time. I have at least one Christian relative who worked for a homosexual boss and spoke well of him as both a professional and generally nice guy. This never stood out to me as something odd or unpopular among all the Christians I’ve known throughout my life. Furthermore, Christians have commonly worked with, hired, overseen, and answered to people (whatever their personal sexual practices) who support political change in favor of homosexual marriage (as well who support legal abortion, etc).
The liberals (homosexual or not) who work at Mozilla are a pack of self-righteous, cruel, intolerant, self-worshiping cretins by the standards of normal American culture. And even liberals are embarrassed by them. They are self-consciously rejecting the practice of the same tolerance that Christians show to them all the time. They are excusing themselves by pretending that disbelieving in same sex “marriage” is some kind of personal attack on their person. Persecuted people all over the planet hope and pray for the kind of “persecution” that sends these people into their boiling rages and excommunication campaigns.
What sissies these people are—who can’t work for a pro-homosexual boss because back in 2010 he supported the same position on marriage that Barack Obama held. Unlike Obama, he didn’t change his position because it was expedient to do so. What spoiled children to fly into a rage because a man is too mature and self-confident to try to placate them.
The expulsion of Branden Eich should not be a First Amendment issue, but in fact it is. Stern’s article is a lie because it pretends that homosexuals aren’t using and advocating legislation to force people to participate in homosexual weddings as photographers and cake decorators. Stern is the complete hypocrite here again. Nor does he mention that Eich’s name came up because
the IRS leaked it the state of California forced his identity to be publicized so that self-styled liberals could exact retribution. In both cases the government is using coercion to manipulate speech, to encourage some to silence and others to open advocacy.
Stern is an illiberal hypocrite. But when I told you he wrote for Slate, you already knew that.