Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

To our readers…

Prop 8 Prop 8 trial Right-wing

Mozila Firefox users will see this pop-up when you access the site.
Mozila Firefox users will see this pop-up when you access the site.
This is just a note about the changes some of you will see on the site starting today.

If you’re accessing via Mozilla Firefox, you’ll notice a pop-up. We are urging our readers to access the site through a different browser. Mozilla’s CEO, Brendan Eich, opposes LGBT equality, and he donated money to the campaign supporting Prop 8 in California.

As a blog that was initially created to allow marriage equality supporters to follow the Prop 8 trial, we felt that we needed to make a statement opposing their new CEO’s actions in opposition to equal rights. Prop 8’s passage hurt many Californians and LGBT people nationwide. Many of our readers were personally affected by the campaign that was waged in support of Prop 8. We felt that it was necessary to take a stand in support of everyone who has dealt with its effects.

Users who still want to access the site using Firefox will be able to do that (there is a link), but we would ask you to use another browser if you can.


– Scottie and the EqualityOnTrial team


  • 1. Dr. Z  |  April 2, 2014 at 12:17 pm

    Good for you!

  • 2. Fr. Bill  |  April 2, 2014 at 12:32 pm

    For us non-techies (yet) any recommendations of browsers that work well and aren't controlled by the new corpacracy?

  • 3. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 12:35 pm

    Personally, I switched to Chrome and it seems to work really well.

    I've used Firefox for a really long time so I felt weird about using a different one, but it works.

  • 4. Frisky1  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:05 pm

    I use Chrome but its owner, Google, apparently belongs to ALEC–which is responsible for lots of terrible legislation across the country. I don't know if the religious freedom AKA we want to legally hate on gays bills have been tied back to Alec but that's the type of thing they promote.

  • 5. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:08 pm

    Both Google AND Facebook, apparently. 🙁

  • 6. Steve  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:37 pm

    I'm not a big fan of Chrome because it has the tabs on top BS and I don't think there is a way to change that. Even with extensions. At least with Firefox you can still do it in about:config

  • 7. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:39 pm

    I'm discovering that I can't get the autocomplete thing to go away on Chrome either, when I go to a URL. Hmm. Well there's always IE or Safari or Opera.

  • 8. Guest  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:54 pm

    Removing Autocomplete in the Address Bar on Chrome

  • 9. erasure25  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:28 pm

    Why not IE? Microsoft and founder Bill Gates are very pro gay equality… Jokes aside IE10 and 11 are very good browsers.

  • 10. SFBay  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:58 pm

    You're right IE works great for me too.

  • 11. montezuma58  |  April 2, 2014 at 5:02 pm


  • 12. Zack12  |  April 2, 2014 at 12:35 pm

    The last part of your post is something that many of the bigots don't seem to get.
    We know some people don't support marriage equality, that isn't the point.
    The point is Eich donated money to a campaign that used smears and outright lies against same sex couples to take away our right to marry in California after it had been granted to us, one of the only times in history that had been done to a group.
    That helped set the state for defeats in other states the following year, including Maine and NY. The pain of the defeat in NY still haunts my husband and I.
    For those that say forgive and forget, there are somethings where you simply can't do that.
    And Prop 8 is one of them.

  • 13. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 12:45 pm

    Thank you so much for sharing this.

  • 14. Zack12  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:41 pm

    You're very welcome.
    It's the one thing that still amazes me six years later. That the people who passed Prop 8 think we have no right to be outraged over the fact we had the rights of equality taken away from us and that we are supposed to be respectful of that.
    Sorry, not going to happen.

  • 15. JayJonson  |  April 2, 2014 at 2:08 pm

    Yes. And Eich wants to pass this off as a simple disagreement. No. It isn't. It is about defaming people in order to deny them constitutional rights. Indeed, to take away rights the California Supreme Court said we had. In his latest interview, Eich said he was all for diversity and was getting lots of support from Indonesians who are opposed to same-sex marriage–and all this about how Mozilla is a staunch defender of openness for the web. Somehow, I think Indonesia or Uganda or Russia or other countries so opposed to same-sex marriage actually care very much about how open the Web is.

  • 16. mark  |  April 7, 2014 at 4:29 pm

    Yes, but grasshopper…if you go out for revenge, dig two graves.

    The victory laps the gay community is taking are WAY over the top in this case (I'm a gay man with a partner who can't get married in NV because of a similar effort to Prop 8). If this CEO can be forced out of his job for giving money to Prop 8, what will we say when opponents to our causes hound a gay CEO out of his job because of a position they find objectionable? Will it be OK for them to take a victory lap? I just don't understand our inability to allow him the right to donate money on his own time (not as a CEO) from his job performance.

  • 17. Straight Ally #3008  |  April 7, 2014 at 4:35 pm

    You know the anti-gay side would take a victory lap. Look at what happened with World Vision. If they had it their way, you'd be shoved into the closet. Eich resigned, he wasn't fired. He had the bad fortune to be CEO of Mozilla rather than Chick-fil-A; the tech world is much more progressive and he reacted responsibly to the negative blowback for his past actions.

  • 18. Kevin  |  April 2, 2014 at 12:37 pm

    I only use Firefox for gay porn torrents.

  • 19. Tyler O.  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:32 pm

    I'm old fashioned so I've only used IE my whole life. I don't even know what Firefox is!

  • 20. Retired lawyer  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:34 pm

    I agree with you entirely. The idea of donating money to an effort to deprive people of their equal rights is utterly repulsive. No one needs Firefox. As a browser, Chrome works fine. I have been using it for years, and have found it to be reliable and easy to use.

  • 21. Rik  |  April 2, 2014 at 1:34 pm

    I didn't know that, but I am disappointed to hear and will definitely support you on this!

  • 22. Eric  |  April 2, 2014 at 2:05 pm

    The problem I have with Eich, isn't his personal beliefs, it is his evasive refusal to repudiate his support of an unconstitutional law that stripped fellow citizens of one of their fundamental rights.

    Q: If you had the opportunity to donate to a Proposition 8 cause today, would you do so?

    Eich: I hadn't thought about that. It seems that's a dead issue. I don't want to answer hypotheticals. Separating personal beliefs here is the real key here. The threat we're facing isn't to me or my reputation, it's to Mozilla.


    Eich's answer is not an answer in support of due process and equal protection under the law. Mozilla's reputation is already tarnished, clearly as an organization, it is fine with a leader that supported and continues to support unconstitutional laws. NOM et. al. aside, what organization would want a CEO that supports unconstitutional laws?

    The problem the board has now, is that Mozilla has been trying to make inroads into anti-gay Indonesia with their mobile operating system. If the board decides to choose a new leader that values due process and equal protection under the law, Mozilla will most likely lose marketshare in Indonesia.

  • 23. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 2:20 pm

    Yeah the CNET interview really made me think he's totally unwilling to acknowledge that the Prop 8 campaign was harmful.

  • 24. JayJonson  |  April 2, 2014 at 2:09 pm

    I find Chrome much better than Firefox. I had lots of problems with Firefox, especially crashes because of adobe flash incompatibility.

  • 25. Netamigo  |  April 2, 2014 at 6:21 pm

    That is true but I don't like Chrome because it will not permit some downloads.

  • 26. JimT  |  April 2, 2014 at 2:16 pm

    I use Safari for Windows

  • 27. Simon  |  April 2, 2014 at 2:36 pm

    As CEO he needs to do what is best for the organization he leads, and surely he knows what that is: apologize for his Prop 8 donation, admit that it was wrong, and announce that he now supports marriage equality. If his personal views don't permit him to do that, then his personal views don't permit him to serve the best interests of Mozilla, in which case the right thing to do would be to resign.

  • 28. Jack  |  April 2, 2014 at 7:06 pm

    Forcing him to do something won't truly show his view. Once again you all need to pick your battles. Of course I'll get every person on here say you aren't gay! Traitor etc. move on! What more do you want? Gays can marry in Cali and we're quickly winning across the country. Are you going to say someone should be fire each and everytime you disagree with them on something? Damn

  • 29. ragefirewolf  |  April 2, 2014 at 7:47 pm

    You're clearly missing the point. It's been said a million times that it's not about his personal views. It's that he actively supported the hateful Prop 8 campaign itself. His personal opinions would mean little to us if he hadn't used his Mozilla paycheck to fight against our rights. Knowing that, Mozilla still made him CEO. That is the reason for the boycott. Au contraire, you are the one who needs to move on…move on to a different site if you don't like the way things are.

  • 30. Deeelaaach  |  April 3, 2014 at 3:15 am

    He has the right to believe the way he does, even if he is ill informed or chooses to disbelieve science, or worse, chooses to be willfully ignorant. Mozilla has the right to keep him on as CEO, though this action shows Mozilla's true colors.

    And we have the right to choose not to use their browser, and to ask others to do the same.

  • 31. RexG  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:03 pm

    With the overwhelming support my fellow readers have expressed, I think I missed something fundamental here. The post makes it sound like this man supported the Prop. 8 campaign personally, not in his official capacity with Firefox or as its representative. If that's the case, I'm bewildered at this action and our support for it. We have been arguing that Hobby Lobby is not a person, and that it does not have innate religious rights that are Constitutionally protected, although its employees and owners do. Yet, here, we are punishing Firefox and Mozilla for the personal beliefs of this man, effectively arguing that the company IS a person with intrinsic values defined by the personal views of the CEO. Haven't we argued that laws like ENDA are good things, because it is wrong for a company to discriminate against an employee or job candidate solely because that person is gay or gay-supportive? Yet, here, we are arguing that Firefox should get rid of this man solely because he is NOT gay or sufficiently gay-supportive for our standards. How can we expect to prevail in our society if we reverse our position every time the context changes? I'm asking these questions sincerely, but with some trepidation because I fear inciting a flame riot. I'm probably overlooking something obvious.

  • 32. Eric  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:17 pm

    The issue isn't his personal beliefs, the issue is his continued and unrepudiated support of an unconstitutional law. If he had donated $1000 to a ballot initiative to again strip Asians of their right to own property in California, we would not be having this discussion.

  • 33. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:18 pm

    The whole point is that Mozilla is itself generally supportive of LGBT equality, but their new CEO opposes it. No one's saying anything about whether Mozilla is a person or not.

    In the Hobby Lobby case, the company was asserting religious objections to providing contraception. Here, a guy who opposes LGBT equality was hired by a generally LGBT-supportive company, and a lot of the company's employees as well as grassroots supporters are upset about his hiring. They don't feel that he best represents what Mozilla stands for.

    Obviously Mozilla shouldn't "discriminate" against anyone, including this CEO, but that's not even remotely an issue here. People have called on him to resign (even some Mozilla staffers) but I haven't personally seen anyone even asking Mozilla to fire him.

    And I mean as far as people speaking out about his beliefs, that's free speech, just as much as his beliefs are free speech. I think people have the right to not use their products until he resigns. As I wrote in the post, Prop 8 hurt a lot of people, and many of those people actively read our site. I think they can be supported as well.

    And I say all of this respectfully, and don't intend to come off as harsh.

  • 34. Keith  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:33 pm

    Okay I got it. Disagreeing with a boycott of Firefox browser is not being supportive.

  • 35. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:38 pm

    No, my post specifically says that anyone can still access the site with Firefox. It's just a pop-up urging people not to, and explaining why. But it's easy to click out of the pop-up.

  • 36. DrPatrick1  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:33 pm

    Would you feel the same bewilderment if people were outraged by a corporation hiring the leader of the KKK to be their CEO? What about a civil rights organization expressing its outrage over such a hiring? The truth is, we, the public, have few options to express our opinions other than these boycotts. No one is preventing Firefox from accessing information, just alerting its users to the controversy. The corporation made a decision to hire this man, and a protest such as this seems appropriate. Again, it is not his personal beliefs that are at issue here. He used his money (this is the same as using his voice a la Citizens United) to actively campaign against the civil rights of a minority community. You don't like marriage equality, don't attend the wedding. To actively campaign to prevent the couple from accessing the same rights you yourself enjoy, that is what so many find so objectionable.

  • 37. Chrys  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:23 pm

    Yes, this, exactly. Mozilla itself has been very clear in its support of equality, and private owners of corporations are entitled to their private views. If Eich holds them, no matter how hateful they are, he is entitled to do so. If he starts to use Mozilla as a platform for bigotry, that is a different thing.

    I am very uncomfortable with the idea of trying to force a corporation to control the views of its employees, even those in the CEO position. His own money, his own hatred, his own choices. As long as the corporation itself is supportive of equality, I don't agree with a boycott.

  • 38. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:32 pm

    He's entitled to do so, but he's not entitled to escape criticism for those views.

  • 39. chrismac2  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:34 pm

    I think the thing is here, as you said, Mozilla has been very clear in its support of equality. So the integrity/sincerity of that support is called into question when you hire an anti-gay equality person as your top leader. You've just hired someone as your top leader who doesn't believe/support all the very pro-equality values that you supposedly promote. If I were an employee of Mozilla, as a gay man, I would very much disapprove of the decision to hire Eich as CEO. A leader is supposed to promote the company values and lead by example. He won't be able to do that on diversity and gay equality issues.

    I support the boycott simply as a way to send a message. If they had just hired an anti-semite, or someone who had donated money to white supremacist organizations, we wouldn't be having this debate……the fact that we are in this case because he's "only" anti-gay saddens me.

  • 40. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:41 pm

    I should add to this conversation: it's really important to note that the protests and opposition to Eich began with Mozilla's own staffers, and people at the grassroots level who are supporters. So it really IS an issue about people just being stunned/shocked and questioning things.

    LGBT groups haven't really gotten too involved yet, and most of the anger at Eich is coming from people who aren't particularly politically active. So that's important to note.

  • 41. Kevin  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:44 pm

    We actually don't know what he is doing to employees or what the culture of Mozilla is for minorities, sexual or otherwise. I think raising awareness is generally a good thing.

  • 42. Keith  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:14 pm

    Well stated. I agree. How would everyone feel if the CEO of a company demanded employees resign because they supported political or social campaigns with which the CEO disagreed.

  • 43. Eric  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:00 pm

    How is that remotely comparable with a CEO continuing to support an unconstitutional law that had a material impact on employees of the organization?

  • 44. chrismac2  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:19 pm

    I think it's different when you're in a leadership position, as the CEO is, when you have mission statements, and values, and policies promoting diversity and equality. As a leader you have to promote those values, otherwise they're hollow. If his personal beliefs get in the way of leading on those issues, then he should not have been hired because he's not a good fit for the values of the company. He should voluntarily resign, and we have a right to let the Mozilla company know that we don't approve of their hiring decision.

    I think it's interesting–the hand-wringing over whether a boycott is warranted or not. Just replace anti-gay with any other minority and suddenly it's less controversial (the idea of a boycott). What does it say about our self-value if we're ok with him being anti-gay, but not anti-black, or anti-semitic?

  • 45. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:31 pm

    I think you're right. But also, there's the simple fact that, I mean, we put a pop-up on the site urging people not to use Firefox. Everyone's still completely able to use it and to access the site with it. There's just a pop-up asking people not to. I mean, this isn't a hugely invasive protest.

    And I get that Eich has a right to free speech, he certainly does not lack the right to give money to pass a constitutional amendment barring human beings in California from ever marrying the person they love, but anyone who opposes his views also has the right to express their opinions. I never understood the idea that we have to allow people who oppose us to speak without challenging them. And I guess I view the pop-up as just the statement we made on this issue.

    So yeah, the hand wringing is pretty interesting!

  • 46. Retired lawyer  |  April 3, 2014 at 6:19 am

    I should have made this more clear earlier: I am 100 percent with you on this. You are exactly right.

  • 47. JayJonson  |  April 3, 2014 at 6:33 am

    In 30 states, gay people can be fired simply for being gay, quite apart from their political beliefs or action. When that gap is closed, then perhaps I'll shed tears for Brendan Eich. I wonder how many of the people attacking gays for "bullying" Mozilla are asking their congressmen to support ENDA?

  • 48. JustMe  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:19 pm

    So let me get this straight … you dont want to use a browser because the CEO of the corporation contributed to the Prop 8 campaign…

    But you have no problem in your own website using JavaScript… which is ALSO his invention…

    // Google Analytics for WordPress by Yoast v4.3.3 |
    var _gaq = _gaq || [];
    _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-17346156-2']);
    (function () {
    var ga = document.createElement('script');
    ga.type = 'text/javascript';
    ga.async = true;
    ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www&#039😉 + '';

    var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0];
    s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s);

  • 49. Eric  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:56 pm

    Following your analogy, Eich should get out of the software business because Turning was gay.

    If Eich had developed JavaScript on his own and nothing had changed in the language, you might have a point. But, JavaScript was developed by Netscape almost 20 years ago and has had many many people contribute to the ECMAScript standard.

  • 50. Eric  |  April 2, 2014 at 3:57 pm

    The prior post should read Turing, not Turning, as in Alan Turing.

  • 51. JustMe  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:32 pm

    Umm no.

    You're protesting a piece of software that has NOTHING to do with Eich's contribution to Prop 8, and asking people not to use it.

    OTOH, this website actively uses something he developed to display this very content. I counted at least 3 JavaScript references in the page source of this page.

    So… something he was personally involved in, you use it. Something he has NOTHING to do with, you want to ban it.

  • 52. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:36 pm

    No one's trying to ban anything. We're asking people who support LGBT equality to use a different browser. But the pop-up is just a pop-up and even Firefox users can get rid of it and still access the site. Not sure how that constitutes a ban. It's a polite request to use a different browser.

  • 53. chrismac2  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:39 pm

    I believe the point is to send a message to Mozilla, not to Eich personally. –least that's how *I* view this– That we do not support Mozilla's decision to hire an anti-gay equality bigot to lead a company that claims to support gay equality.

    Claiming that well we should stop using anything that Eich has ever touched misses the point and clouds the issue. It's very simple, it's just a way to send a message to Mozilla, nothing more, nothing less.

  • 54. JustMe  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:57 pm

    Some Mozillians may identify with activities or organizations that do not support the same inclusion and diversity standards as Mozilla. When this is the case:

    (a) support for exclusionary practices must not be carried into Mozilla activities.
    (b) support for exclusionary practices in non-Mozilla activities should not be expressed in Mozilla spaces.
    (c) when if (a) and (b) are met, other Mozillians should treat this as a private matter, not a Mozilla issue.

  • 55. chrismac2  |  April 2, 2014 at 5:24 pm

    Again, he's the top leader of the company and with his public donation to an unconstitutional proposition to strip away gays of a civil right, he's made public his conflict with Mozilla's own stated values.

    Yes, they have these governance rules to give themselves an out so they can hire staff who may disagree with some of these values, but again, he's not just any employee, he is the top, most visible leader. I can understand the hurt that gay employees may feel that they hired this man to lead the company.

    None of those rules have any bearing on us letting our voices be heard and sending the mozilla board a message

  • 56. Eric  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:43 pm

    I don't want to ban anything. I choose to not use software by an organization that chooses a CEO that continues to support an unconstitutional law.

  • 57. Jack  |  April 2, 2014 at 7:15 pm

    You're no different than millions of mom organization. Stupid "boycotts"

  • 58. Deeelaaach  |  April 3, 2014 at 3:33 am

    A decision by one person to not use a product does not a boycott make. I don't recall that there has been an official call for a boycott. I recall a respectful request being made. But I suppose that is a matter of opinion and interpretation.

  • 59. KarlS  |  April 4, 2014 at 7:32 pm

    If you knew 8 more things, you would be an idiot.

  • 60. Zack12  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:38 pm

    If this guy had helped donate to an amendment that took away rights from any other group such as blacks, latinos, hispanics or women the outrage some people have that we in the LGBT community are calling for a boycott wouldn't be an issue.
    Let me state this again for some of you, from May 16th until Nov 4th of 2008, gay and lesbian couples in California had the right to get married and be treated as any other couple.
    Prop 8 took that right away, one of the only times in history a minority group lost a right that had been granted to them.
    It was bad enough to see ads smearing us and stating it was OK to vote to take away our rights, it was even worse to see the bigots gloating over their win.
    This website was started because of all that.
    No, we aren't wrong for calling for boycotts and demanding this man step down. Every cent he gave helped hurt our community.
    And as I said before, this conversation wouldn't be happening if it was any other group. Enough is enough.

  • 61. Eric  |  April 2, 2014 at 4:50 pm

    Replace the Prop 8 references with Prop 14 (1964). Both amendments to the California constitution were found unconstitutional. If Eich continued to support Prop 14, like he does Prop 8, would you support an organization that made him CEO?

  • 62. JustMe  |  April 2, 2014 at 5:21 pm

    Once again, what somebody does in their PRIVATE life is not the public face of a company.

  • 63. Christian  |  April 2, 2014 at 5:49 pm

    It speaks volumes about the integrity and moral values of a company that elects to appoint a deeply prejudiced person (evidenced by the donation, which is publicly accessible just like a library book, of a grand to a hateful ballot initiative that was found unconstitutional and utter lack of remorse for doing so) to high office.

    It very much is the public face of a company.

  • 64. Leo  |  April 2, 2014 at 5:51 pm

    If someone wants to enact amendments to their private club's constitution, I suppose it's their business. State politics and political donations are not private life.

  • 65. NetAmigo  |  April 2, 2014 at 6:25 pm

    Anyone know why Eich believes this way? I assume it is religion but I could not find anything online about a religious connection. Just curious.

  • 66. skrekk  |  April 2, 2014 at 7:41 pm

    Eich is Mormon.

  • 67. Fr. Bill  |  April 2, 2014 at 8:32 pm

    Is this verified? That would explain both his donation to the the Prop 8 crusade and his reluctance to say anything contrary to The Truth as received from SLC – whether he agrees with it or not. Prop 8 has and will continue to be a PR disaster until they get a new revelation.

  • 68. JimT  |  April 3, 2014 at 4:19 am

    The leaders of the Mormon Church should have seen that "new revelation" when Bill Marriott and Harry Reid, who are also Mormons and personally believe marriage is between a man and woman, came out publicly in support of marriage equality back in 2012:

    In an interview last year with Business Insider, Bill Marriott explained that he personally believed that marriage was between a man and a woman. But he said he does not mix his views on the subject with operation of the business. "We have to take care of our people, regardless of their sexual orientation or anything else," Bill Marriott said. "We have all the American values: the values of hard work, the values of integrity, the values of fairness and respect." He further pointed out, "Our church is very much opposed to alcohol and we're probably one of the biggest sales engines of liquor in the United States. I don't drink. We serve a lot of liquor."

    "My personal belief is that marriage is between a man and a woman. But in a civil society, I believe that people should be able to marry whomever they want, and it's no business of mine if two men or two women want to get married," Reid said.

  • 69. JimT  |  April 3, 2014 at 4:23 am

    “Many of his (Marriott) shareholders, customers, and employees don’t belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Their values matter, too.”

  • 70. weaverbear  |  April 2, 2014 at 6:46 pm

    OK – wow. A couple of quick thoughts here.

    I'm a Firefox user and have been for several years. Am I happy with their choice of a new CEO? No, but UNTIL I see him steering their company into places that are clearly anti-gay (or for that matter anti-any minority group) am I willing to stop using their product? No. I will be watching however. I have no problems if any of you out there choose to go elsewhere and use another browser, but I'm not ready to jump just yet. Yes, Microsoft has decent policies in hiring gay folk and supporting our rights. I switched to Firefox when I was not happy with IE 8 (at least I think it was 8). As for other browsers, looking at the corporations that produce them and what they promote is important. Another poster earlier counted out Google's membership in ALEC. That alone is enough to give me pause in switching to that product.

    As for boycotts, yes I think it's important for us to recognize what we support with our $$. Hell is likely to freeze over, before I set foot in a Chick-fil-A. Their COO/CEO and the company's charitable foundation WinShape actively contribute to groups that oppose our marital rights. I appreciate that they're open about it. It makes it very clear to me why I shouldn't patronize their business. If I'm not mistaken the company is still privately owned, and espouses the views of it's founders, the Cathy family, who're staunch Southern Baptists. They have a right to live their faith. AND I have a right not to support them.

  • 71. Jim  |  April 2, 2014 at 6:46 pm

    Thank you, Scottie.

    I've been meaning to leave Firefox for some time; my friends long ago moved to Chrome.

    Well, five minutes ago, I moved my bookmarks over to Chrome, my new browser.

    (See ya, Brendan.)

  • 72. Jack  |  April 2, 2014 at 7:01 pm

    So it's ok for Mozilla CEO to be fired yet firing gays isn't? Seems a bit hypocritical to me. You all seriously need to choose your battles too. Move on already! We are already winning.

  • 73. ragefirewolf  |  April 2, 2014 at 8:02 pm

    You having a bigoted and publicly known viewpoint, which is a choice, is definitely a firable quality. Being gay, which is not a choice, is not a firable quality. There's nothing hypocritical about it.

  • 74. JayJonson  |  April 3, 2014 at 6:02 am

    Yes, I am sure that you and Brendan Eich are ardent supporters of ENDA. How much money have you and Eich given to the passage of ENDA? Oh, none. But he has given money to Pat Buchanan and the proponents of Prop 8? Why is it do I think that employment nondiscrimination is not really at the forefront of his or your agenda?

  • 75. Michael Grabow  |  April 3, 2014 at 6:03 am

    What is it that you are winning?

  • 76. Michael Grabow  |  April 3, 2014 at 8:24 am

    So, you can give me a thumbs down, but you can't answer my question? Sounds like you have a strong argument.

  • 77. ragefirewolf  |  April 2, 2014 at 8:04 pm

    Scottie, please don't let the few dissenters here change your mind on this action. It's well intended and a good thing. Thank you for taking the initiative.

  • 78. CarrotCakeMan  |  April 2, 2014 at 8:47 pm

    At least he reported his contribution. The federal judge who revoked the 2008 California anti-gay H8te Vote had in his possession an email written by Catholic bishops to Mormon leaders in which they both agreed to violate California campaign finance laws to throw the H8te Vote by making secret, illegal cash and in-kind contributions to the H8te Vote. The email serves as proof positive they knew they were breaking the law; the email itself is an act of criminal collusion. Here is documentation about that email:

    I wonder what Scalia and Alito thought of that evidence of their bishops' criminal activities–and when CA AG Harris will get that evidence and seek indictments.

  • 79. Deeelaaach  |  April 3, 2014 at 2:05 am

    The latest version of Safari, 6.0.x, does not support Windows. You can get the older version (about 2 years old) at a link posted above by Jim T (

    I stopped using IE years ago due to security issues. Perhaps it is time to reevaluate this. I used Safari for a time before switching to Firefox but changed to Firefox when Safari 5 came out. It was ridiculously slow on my old computer. I use Chrome occasionally but have my reservations due to Google's policies. Opera is another option.

    My primary concerns in choosing a browser are security, privacy, browser support etc. Going to a 2 year old browser doesn't inspire confidence for example. But I do make decisions about where I shop based on corporate policy among other things – if the corporation has a history of anti-LGBT policies, I won't shop there until it is obvious they've turned over a new leaf.

    My choice of browser should not be any different in my mind. It's not as easy as just saying I'll shop here instead of there, but I guess it's time to start reevaluating browsers. I'll be looking at IE – are there less security concerns today as opposed to five to ten years ago? What exactly are Google's Chrome policies? I know what their Gmail on Chrome policy is – or what it was a year ago. What about Opera? And what about other up and coming browsers, if any? Note that I'm only asking these things rhetorically here as I'm not likely to come back and visit this post. But I'll be asking them in the coming days as I look for a new browser – or an old new browser.

    I guess I'm saying that I'm with you on the browser switch, but it will take me some time. Extreme fatigue (to the point of being housebound most of the week) makes research difficult, but it's important to me to support pro-LGBT organizations etc. So I may not make the switch overnight, but I am looking to make the switch. I'll miss Firefox – Mozilla has been good to me, but hiring an anti-LGBT CEO sends a message – and not a good one.

    A final note: If any of this has been covered above I have not yet read it. Fatigue dictates I post what is on my mind before I forget it, and fatigue really affects my memory early in what passes for my day.

  • 80. David in London  |  April 3, 2014 at 3:22 am

    Thanks to this I've (perhaps temporarily) abandoned my long-term use of Firefox and am now using Safari instead (I'm a Mac user). Unfortunately for Mozilla, doing this has opened my eyes as to how much Safari has improved since I last used it. The longer this goes on the less likely it is I'll switch back.

  • 81. Kevin  |  April 3, 2014 at 9:16 am

    I know, Safari really has gotten better. Both apps still seem like memory hogs on my machine though :/

  • 82. JayJonson  |  April 3, 2014 at 6:11 am

    I find it interesting that Robert George and Maggie Gallagher are whining about how unfair gay people are to be attacking Eich. Notwithstanding their hypocrisy–after all, NOM is still boycotting Starbucks and ONE MILLION MOMS announces a new boycott target every week–perhaps they will see the need for nondiscrimination laws on the basis of sexual orientation since they profess to be so shocked SHOCKED yes SHOCKED that someone might be called upon to resign for having worked to deprive others of their rights. Oh no. They are in favor of laws like that just passed in Mississippi that allows people to fire gays and others on the basis of THEIR religious beliefs.

  • 83. Jack  |  April 3, 2014 at 7:36 am

    I guessed right. Is get personally attacked by everyone on here because someone doesn't have the same opinion as all of you! This web site doesn't speak for the whole gay community and there is many in it that grow tired of these petty bs such as on here. Mozilla's CEO donated some money towards Prop 8. So freaking what? Mozilla has already shown they're for gay rights. What more do you freaking want? Are you all going to call for a boycott of everyone product out there that has a anti-gay person in it? Better look at EVERY product you have in your house! Once again you all look hypocritical. It's ok for him to be fired yet if us gays heaven forbid! You object! I'll say it again and again! You ALL need to pick your battles!

  • 84. JayJonson  |  April 3, 2014 at 8:21 am

    I made an error in voting up your comment, Jack. I meant to vote it down. Again, my question to you is why is Eich's job so important. Do you think Eich supports ENDA? Do you? I am all for prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Most of the people who are freaking out in support of this poor CEO apparently do not care a whit about the gay people who are fired simply for being gay and/or who live under fear of being fired in most of the states. They are also pushing bills like the one vetoed in Arizona and just signed into law in Mississippi that allows people to refuse service to gays and others on the basis of religious beliefs.

    You're right, we have lots of battles to fight. Not using Firefox is not a big deal, but why is it that Eich gets to express his political beliefs, but we aren't? Freedom of expression goes both ways, and my freedom of expression includes deciding not to use Firefox or other Mozilla products as long as they are headed by a bigot.

  • 85. Jack  |  April 3, 2014 at 10:24 am

    It's called moving on dude. I can careless what some idiot thinks. Nor do I care what Eich did.

  • 86. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 3, 2014 at 8:23 am

    I don't think anyone is attacking. It's not like you're forbidden to oppose the boycott. No one's even forbidden to use Firefox to access this site. We just politely asked people to use another browser. But there's not a test or something to post comments here or to read EOT. We have general guidelines for posting but those aren't strict at all.

    We're doing this because the site was created after the fall out from Prop 8, and a lot of people depended on this site to cover the litigation surrounding Prop 8. Californians and other people (I live in Alabama) formed a community here and it's important to speak out when someone has done something that affected most if not all of our readers. A lot of pain was caused by the campaign to pass Prop 8 and by the antics in the trial. Those events seriously messed up a lot of people's lives ( and so I don't think we are out of bounds posting a pop-up on the site.

    But of course, you are completely entitled to oppose it.

  • 87. JimT  |  April 3, 2014 at 12:49 pm

    You don't have to defend this to anyone, it was the right action to do.

  • 88. just wondering  |  April 3, 2014 at 7:48 am

    I'm all for voting with our wallets, but could someone please explain why a boycott of the Firefox browser would harm the CEO? With Chik-fil-A, I get it… $$$ for food = money for anti-gay CEO. The Firefox browser is free… there isn't any ad revenue that I'm aware of built into the browser. How does using the browser give Eich money? Is there some sort of revenue stream tied to the browser's use that somehow funnels money into Eich's pockets? /confused tech user

  • 89. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 3, 2014 at 8:25 am

    It isn't a money thing in this instance. It's more about pressure. I understand your point definitely, but the goal hasn't been to deny Mozilla any money (they're generally a supportive company.)

  • 90. nightshayde  |  April 3, 2014 at 10:08 am

    I am wondering the same thing, just wondering. I won't go to Chik-fil-A. I've been boycotting Carl's Jr, Mrs Fields, Coors & Dominos since the early 90s because of their stances on reproductive rights (plus I never liked Coors anyway – blech). If boycotting Firefox doesn't affect the monetary bottom line, I don't see the point. How are Eich and Mozilla going to be pressured by my switching browsers? How would they even know?

    I'm troubled by the fact that a decision Eich made back in 2008 (albeit a really hurtful, awful decision) is being used as strongly as a call to action as it is right now. Whether or not he still holds the same views he did six years ago is unclear. It's certainly possible that his views haven't changed at all — but it's also possible that his views are "evolving," as did the views of some very significant politicians since the 2008 election (and that he's trying to walk a tightrope between risking the wrath of pro-equality people and risking the wrath of anti-equality people).

    He IS entitled to his personal beliefs, no matter how wrong they might be. If he can separate his (possibly still wrong) personal beliefs from his actions at Mozilla, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt FOR NOW. If he donates money to a hate group or borderline hate group NOW, or if he actively contributes/supports anti-gay policies either here in the US or abroad, I will likely change browsers. If he keeps his (possible) bigotry to himself but manages his company in an inclusive, LGBT-supportive manner, I'll stay where I am.

  • 91. Chrys  |  April 3, 2014 at 11:25 am

    Yes, exactly. As long as he keeps his own private feelings out of the corporate policies, he is entitled to have them. And a private donation years ago should not be the issue it seems to be, today. The man is entitled to his beliefs, whether or not I agree with them.

    As far as the person who mentioned NOM's boycott of Starbucks, above – well, the difference is that they are boycotting a corporation based on the policies of that corporation, not on what the CEO did with his own money years ago, or what the CEO happens to believe now. And that is a pretty substantial difference.

  • 92. CarrotCakeMan  |  April 3, 2014 at 12:12 pm

    I found out Carl's Jr. has apparently stopped making anti-gay donations since the founder, Carl Karcher, died while I was doing some research a couple years ago into the California burger chain In-n-Out. Unlike Dan Cathy of Chick Fil A, Carl Karcher made those donations to anti-gay groups with his own money, not corporate funds like Dan Cathy.

    While we're on the subject, In-n-Out is known for placing Bible verses in discrete places of their wrappings and cups. I checked, none of the verses are the disputed anti-gay "clobber passages," and I had to go two family member owner/presidents back, the man who added the Bible verses, to find any political donations, for a 1980s proposition for school vouchers.

  • 93. nightshayde  |  April 3, 2014 at 1:28 pm

    CarrotCakeMan — as you did your research on Carl's Jr, did you happen to notice whether or not they're still funding anti-choice groups? I know once upon a time it was Operation Rescue they funded, but I'm not sure that organization even exists any more. I didn't actually know about their anti-LGBT activities, but I'm glad to read at least THAT has stopped.

  • 94. weaverbear  |  April 3, 2014 at 1:31 pm

    In-N-Out is currently the only fast food chain I'll patronize. They pay a living wage and even their part timers get healthcare benefits after three months. Further, their charitable foundation is targeting homeless and at risk youth. While I'm not crazy about their bible quotes, Christians run the gamut from Fred Phelps to Troy Perry, from Pat Robertson and the 700 Club, to Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker movement and Bishop Oscar Romero and liberation theology.

  • 95. Eric  |  April 3, 2014 at 11:22 am

    More non-answers from Eich. He still won't explain why he continues to support stripping some citizens of their right to marry.

  • 96. nightshayde  |  April 3, 2014 at 12:10 pm

    But he is NOT saying that he CONTINUES to support stripping some citizens of their right to marry. I don't think any of us is denying that he supported Prop 8 – but many many people have changed their minds on the issue over the past six years. If he's not actively trying to strip people of rights or trying to keep them from getting rights, he may *not* still support such efforts. We just don't know.

  • 97. Eric  |  April 3, 2014 at 1:07 pm

    He hasn't repudiated his position on Prop 8. And, in the Guardian article, he states that marketshare comes before human rights:

    Eich also stressed that Firefox worked globally, including in countries like Indonesia with “different opinions”, and LGBT marriage was “not considered universal human rights yet, and maybe they will be, but that's in the future, right now we're in a world where we have to be global to have effect”.

  • 98. nightshayde  |  April 3, 2014 at 1:29 pm

    Perhaps it's splitting hairs, but I believe there can be a difference between "continues to support" and "hasn't repudiated."

    Regardless, he's stepped down … so YAY!

  • 99. Jesse  |  April 3, 2014 at 12:24 pm

    You're going to need to update this post, because all this negative publicity worked. Now comes the backlash from equality dissidents saying he was "persecuted".

  • 100. Jesse  |  April 3, 2014 at 12:32 pm

    And confirmed by the Mozilla blog.

  • 101. Scottie Thomaston  |  April 3, 2014 at 1:23 pm

    We just did a new post on this news

  • 102. Zack12  |  April 3, 2014 at 12:40 pm

    I'll what I said before, if he had taken part in donating to something that took away rights from any other minority group, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

  • 103. nightshayde  |  April 3, 2014 at 12:49 pm

    Well, clutch my pearls and gasp. He actually stepped down.

  • 104. super bowl xlviii jerseys  |  April 15, 2014 at 2:51 am

    $16 Cheap Wholesale NFL Draft Jerseys Wholesale Online With Free Shipping

  • 105. BehSci333  |  August 2, 2014 at 11:48 am

    The latest safari 2014 offline version have some good and new features in it as compared to it old versions. Download offline safari and enjoy having good work…

  • 106. brandall  |  August 2, 2014 at 11:53 am


  • 107. Equality On TrialVictory!&hellip  |  August 7, 2014 at 1:08 am

    […] has taken down the pop-up request urging our readers to switch browsers. We wanted to take a stand on this issue because the blog owes its existence to […]

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!