

OkCupid's CEO Donated to an Anti-Gay Campaign Once, Too - programminggeek
http://m.motherjones.com/mojo/2014/04/okcupid-ceo-donate-anti-gay-firefox

======
lsiebert
This title is disingenuous. He donated to a candidate, and responded with the
following statement in less then 24 hours.

"decade ago, I made a contribution to Representative Chris Cannon because he
was the ranking Republican on the House subcommittee that oversaw the Internet
and Intellectual Property, matters important to my business and our industry.
I accept responsibility for not knowing where he stood on gay rights in
particular; I unequivocally support marriage equality and I would not make
that contribution again today. However, a contribution made to a candidate
with views on hundreds of issues has no equivalence to a contribution
supporting Prop. 8, a single issue that has no purpose other than to
affirmatively prohibit gay marriage, which I believe is a basic civil right."

~~~
briantakita
> During his time as congressman from 1997 to 2009, Cannon voted for a
> constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, against a ban on sexual-
> orientation based job discrimination, and for prohibition of gay adoptions.

The Congressman Cannon took a strong anti-gay stance & supported legislation
allowing job discrimination against homosexuals. The title seems accurate.

> However, a contribution made to a candidate with views on hundreds of issues

Obviously the rights of homosexuals was not that important to Yagan.

~~~
gobots
Donating to a congressman who took a strong anti-gay stance is hardly the same
as "donating to an anti-gay campaign".

~~~
briantakita
It's pretty similar. Actually, it's worse since the congressman is a lawmaker
that can influence other lawmakers with his agenda & draft bills. Yagan is
also rewarding the Cannon for his stance on the issues.

~~~
lsiebert
"Rewarding" instead of "Rewarded" implies that he's continuing to do so. He
stated pretty clearly that he wouldn't make the donation again.

And donating to support a specific law is definitely worse then supporting a
law maker more generally.

~~~
briantakita
Whatever. These witchhunts are distasteful & hypocritical. Bleh!

Then again, I've always been a fan of Jesus' saying "let him who is without
sin cast the first stone". Oops, I can't say Jesus, or "him", because it's
against the new "progressive" order. I fear I will soon have angry atheists &
feminists demanding that I step down from my job for uttering a religious
phrase. Infringing on the atheists' human right to be free of religion &
feminists' human right to be free of the patriarchy & "rape culture". Does
this make me look like a bigot? Please, I want to hold on to my "privilege,
not right", to have a job.

It's like modern "civil rights movements", "progressive movements", blah blah
blah, are corrupted to be the new oppressors and promoting new speak. It's
really sad :-( MLK & Ghandi would be sad.

Feminism has been preaching sexism for a long time. Their tactic of demonizing
anybody who dares to disagree with them are well known and advanced. It sucks
to be a heterosexual male in America. I can't step outside without getting
accused of "promoting rape culture". I hear that will soon become "hate
speech" with jail time. I don't want to get married. I don't want to live with
a woman in america. I already got screwed with that nonsense. My only choices
are to grow a mangina or be gay :-P

Anyways, I guess the "Gay rights" movement has a template to follow. So all of
you can feel better for judging others who are less "progressive" than you. I
wonder if there will be a progressive 1%, because the progressive middle class
is getting hollowed out.

That's ok I guess. All good things get tired and must end. Franchises & knock
offs happen. The quality gets diluted. There will be a new revolution to move
us forward.

\---

Btw, did you know that Jesus was really a feminist who died to save us from
the patriarchy? j/k

------
mdwrigh2
Without commenting on the overall debate, I think this nails the issue with
the article:

> However, a contribution made to a candidate with views on hundreds of issues
> has no equivalence to a contribution supporting Prop. 8, a single issue that
> has no purpose other than to affirmatively prohibit gay marriage, which I
> believe is a basic civil right.

------
gb_
I find this to be another instance of "That's not quite what happened" when
comparing a Mother Jones headline and the article.

------
mkr-hn
I'm upvoting this for the quote they added at the bottom. Brendan Eich was
completely silent about his donation, so people made up their own minds about
his current views. This is fundamentally different since Sam Yagan expanded on
why he donated and what his current views are.

------
gobots
article was sensationalistic (not shocking out of motherjones) and erroneous.
please don't turn HN into reddit.

~~~
briantakita
The whole Eich scandal was also sensationalistic. That's the problem with
being judgmental. Often times the judgmental people are being hypocritical.

~~~
ballard
In addition, it came off as a politically-manufactured "moral panic" more than
anything. [0,1] The gay friends I polled were like "meh."

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_panic)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_FDIV_bug](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_FDIV_bug)

------
Pinatubo
So what was the point of OKCupid's boycott of Mozilla again?

~~~
ballard
Headline$.

------
lcasela
Yay! More witch hunting.

/s

~~~
ballard
I think we need a witch hunting API, that way mob violence can be faster and
more efficient so as to preclude any sort of defense.

------
emocakes
lets create a big internet shitstorm and make him resign. sad case about what
happened to the Mozilla ex-CEO.

------
mattbillenstein
Off with his head!!

