Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 31st Mar 2014 23:45 UTC
Mozilla & Gecko clones

For the Internet community, the principles of free speech and equal rights are foundational. But in recent days, those issues are clashing at Mozilla, the nonprofit foundation and tech company behind the Firefox browser.

At issue is Brendan Eich, a co-founder of Mozilla, inventor of the much used Javascript programming language and the newly appointed CEO of the company. Eich made a $1,000 donation to the campaign for California's Proposition 8, which defined marriage as only between a man and a woman. The donation had come to light in 2012, but fizzled.

Opposing same-sex marriage is no different than opposing interracial marriage. As a Dutchman, it baffles me that an organisation like Mozilla appointed a man with such medieval ideas.

Permalink for comment 585721
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: OSNews = On Sex News
by ricegf on Tue 1st Apr 2014 11:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: OSNews = On Sex News"
ricegf
Member since:
2007-04-25

1) Why could sacrificial love not apply to people of the same gender? Christ is male, but why is the church female, except to make the analogy work by presupposing marriage as man + woman?


Again, I'm speaking theologically from one practicing Christian's perspective, because you ask.

In Matthew 19, Jesus was asked if divorce (as fashionable then as now) was morally permissible for people of faith. In answering, he specifically pointed back to the very beginning - Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 - where (we believe) God created marriage as a permanent bond between one man and one woman.

I suppose it's valid to claim that Jesus was presupposing the definition of marriage as you state, but only because (we believe) he defined it that way from the start.

2) Why not oppose atheist marriage for the same reason?


Theologically, as far as I know, there's no basis to oppose marriage by non-Christians, as biblical morality applies to Christians rather by definition.

Most of the conflict (from my view) hasn't come from trying to prevent gay marriage itself - I believe a young woman married a dolphin in Florida a few years back, and really, who cares? It's her life - as much as trying to avoid having the government legally recognize such marriages. That was what DOMA actually addressed - it never "outlawed gay marriage", as the press endlessly parroted, but rather prohibited the federal government from recognizing or forcing states to recognize those marriages - unconstitutionally, as it turns out. :-)

It's that whole "you're trying to force your morality on us!" thing that Christians and non-Christians periodically hurl at each other, usually because... well, because we both periodically do exactly that. *sigh*

From the Christian side of things, in the same way that atheists fought all the way to the supreme court to force the Boy Scouts of America organization to accept gay leaders, and the supreme court is at this moment deciding whether a privately owned business can be forced by the government to pay for medical procedures that violate their personal and religious convictions, there is concern that churches and private businesses will similarly be forced to host, perform, and recognize gay marriages even if such actions violate their personal and religious beliefs.

You know, kind of like gay marriage advocates are trying to destroy a man who dares to act in his private life in accordance with his personal beliefs.

Again, I don't particularly care who marries who. For example, while on our honeymoon in Paris, my wife and I toured with a gay couple who happened to be part of our traveling group (this was in the 1980s), and we had a lovely time. I've also had several gay friends through the years, and never had any argument with them. How delightful it would be if we could simply be left to believe as we choose, and act on those beliefs according to the dictates of our conscience, without people who disagree attempting to coerce our actions.

Reply Parent Score: 1