I am distressed at how the controversy at Mozilla has unfolded, with the forced resignation of its new CEO Brendan Eich. It was learned that Eich had donated a total of $1000 to the Proposition 8 campaign, which banned same-sex marriages in California; three Mozilla board members resigned, and a boycott of Mozilla began to take shape. I strenuously disagree with Eich's point of view, but protection against discrimination on political or religious grounds in the workplace means little if only inoffensive political or religious beliefs are protected.
However, some of the arguments for asking Eich to resign do have some merit. Perhaps a comparison between same-sex marriage and interracial marriage makes sense; we would have trouble accepting a CEO who gave money to an organization opposing interracial marriage. Opponents of same-sex marriage resent the comparison; there is of course no effort to ban interracial marriage nowadays. But we should consider how recently interracial marriage was finally made legal in all states in the US--the Loving v. Virginia decision was made the same month that the Beatles album "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" was released. I was seven years old at the time. (I don't remember the Loving decision. But I remember listening to those Beatles songs on the radio that summer.)
Another argument for Eich's resignation is that Mozilla is an unusual organization: it's not an ordinary corporation but instead something of an activist group, with a mission to keep the web open for all. The calls for Eich to resign came from within Mozilla; evidently, people at Mozilla did not believe that Eich's position fit the values of the organization.The apt comparison might be with an organization such as the Boy Scouts of America, which bars gay people from leadership positions, although this comparison isn't very flattering.
A more telling argument against the resignation is that it makes the LGBT community look intolerant; this episode was quickly added to a list of examples of 'gay bullying' and 'liberal intolerance' in conservative commentary. But here, it's worth noting that none of the major LGBT rights organizations, including the Human Rights Campaign (which I donate money to), called for Eich to resign or be removed. (Of course, the conservative rhetoric about bullying and intolerance is difficult to take seriously from people who still teach that gay sexuality is necessarily immoral and unhealthy, as many conservatives do. It's hard to imagine anything more threatening to a young person who is gay to tell them that their sexuality is intrinsically wrong, and anti-gay rhetoric is still widespread in conservative and religious media.)
Nevertheless, at a time when more and more Americans, including Evangelicals, are beginning to understand that gay people and gay marriage are not a threat, it is not helpful to feed a conservative narrative to the contrary. So while the arguments for asking for Eich's resignation have weight, I still believe this shouldn't have happened; I certainly still believe that discrimination in the workplace on religion or politics is wrong.