Progressive – not gay agenda

Occasionally, something comes along that I find completely astounding and outrageous. I will begin this to say that I am a happy Mozilla user, not because of their politics or any other reason – I simply find their products fulfill my needs.

Mozilla's chief executive officer Brendan Eich, was let go this week because in 2008 he donated $1000 to Proposition 8 that sought to make traditional marriage the standard in California. The proposition gained popular vote and passed, that is, until struck down by the courts. Right or wrong, the system went through the process.

The problem comes when an American donated to a particular cause in which he believed and then 6 years later forced from his job for that donation. I personally don't agree with his political choice on this matter, but I will defend his right to disagree with my opinion. In my perfect world, government would not have any say on whom someone married or didn't marry. We know from past experience with interracial couples that government has had poor judgment in this area.

The problem in this instance is that a small group of individuals forced a company to fire a man for voicing his political opinion – not by standing on a podium making proclamations, but by quietly making a donation. I am guessing those calling for his dismissal will not be aware of the firestorm they have created.

There are many who will blame this on the gay agenda. Let me say now there is no gay agenda, only a progressive agenda that operates in the name of homosexuals. There are gay Republican groups like Log Cabin and GOProud where some are for gay marriage, but would decry the destruction of free speech. There are many gays who simply avoid politics, but would love to enjoy the same rights, legally and spiritually, as heterosexual couples. Many of those same people would be saddened that some small group of individuals has cost a man his job, not for bigoted hiring practices, of which there is no evidence, but for simply practicing his 1^st Amendment right to speak out against government or to partake in the governmental process.

The progressive, not the gay, agenda is to squelch all speech by those who think differently. They will stop that speech through mockery, and even worse, by using race or by portraying that speech as hate. They will proclaim to operate in the name of minority groups. We see today that whether it be women or minority rights groups, they protect only progressives within that spectrum. This is the difference between libertarians and progressives – The libertarian will, especially, protect the speech with which they disagree. Popular speech rarely needs protection, but it is the speech of the few, those who think differently, that most needs our protection.

I am disappointed that Mozilla succumbed to those who wish to squelch speech and the free exercise of the political process. Even though I do not agree with Brendan Eich's position, I will protect his right to that choice. Once we live in a country where people are afraid to speak opposition to the majority, or those with the podium, then we have taken the road to ruination. At one time, people were afraid to speak out publicly against slavery. Had people been allowed to speak freely, slavery might have never existed in this country.

To those who use all gays to promote your political agenda, tread carefully. There are many bigots and potential bigots in the country and you are only feeding that bigotry. Those who lead the so-called gay agenda have done more harm to gays than good. To win political ground you must convince people that your side is correct. By using coercion, you force many to run away. The wild animal will run if you chase it screaming. If you approach that animal with treats and understanding then that animal is more likely to follow you home.

For once, do the honorable thing and stop letting a few progressives lead you down the path of fanaticism. Offer Brendan Eich an open hand and try to convince him why he is wrong, just as I will try to convince you, the progressive, that government controlled marriage is the wrong path. In order to prevent government from making this mistake in the future, you must, now, take the power of marriage out of their hands. When all Americans are treated equally by government then we truly live in a free country. 

I should add, this is one of the main dangers of having to disclose donations. It is for exactly this type of retribution that we must change political donation laws to keep them private. We cannot let public pressure ban opposing speech.