> Clicking on the OP will force you to watch an obnoxiously, unskippable loud ad about razors and chest-shaving.
I didn't notice it.
> Sorry, don't think supporting an antigay candidate and a specific antigay law are the same thing.
No, but they are kinda close.
> OKCupid's CEO apologized.
That's definitely the big one. Eich should have done that, and distanced himself from the foolish ideas he held in the past.
That said, I think the call for a Firefox boycott was way over the top, and considering OKCupid's CEO's political support in the past, at least a little hypocritical.
> I don't think he gets the benefit of the doubt of, "Well, he just doesn't want the government to be in the business of regulating marriage." If that were the case, then why hasn't he simply said that, as other political candidates have done?
It's an argument that makes no sense. If he didn't want government to regulate marriage, he wouldn't support a law that regulates marriage (which is what banning gay marriage but allowing straight marriage is: government regulating marriage).
They're kinda close but kinda far as well, supporting an anti-gay candidate may be because
* you have the same views on the subject
* you are not aware of his views (but you can be criticised for lack of due diligence)
* you are aware of his views but support him for other reasons
* you are aware of his views but absolutely don't want the other guy (similar but not identical to 3, you're not supporting a specific candidate so much as supporting anyone other than a candidate)
Of these, only #1 is close to the prop8 situation.
Let's not be dense. They're not even close. It's almost impossible to vet a candidate and figure out his views on each and every position; while with a proposition like prop 8, one just has to read the title to figure out what it's all about.
I didn't notice it.
> Sorry, don't think supporting an antigay candidate and a specific antigay law are the same thing.
No, but they are kinda close.
> OKCupid's CEO apologized.
That's definitely the big one. Eich should have done that, and distanced himself from the foolish ideas he held in the past.
That said, I think the call for a Firefox boycott was way over the top, and considering OKCupid's CEO's political support in the past, at least a little hypocritical.
> I don't think he gets the benefit of the doubt of, "Well, he just doesn't want the government to be in the business of regulating marriage." If that were the case, then why hasn't he simply said that, as other political candidates have done?
It's an argument that makes no sense. If he didn't want government to regulate marriage, he wouldn't support a law that regulates marriage (which is what banning gay marriage but allowing straight marriage is: government regulating marriage).