[balls187]

> Inclusion means accepting people as people, not accepting just the people who look, talk, and share the same beliefs as you.

No. There are some beliefs that run counter to our societies ideals. Those beliefs and the people who espouse them should be shunned. Harshly.

Sorry you (theoretical Republican) don't think Gay people should be allowed to get married. Keep your backward ass beliefs to yourself.

[gitlabuser]

Well I think you've just proved my point. Not all Republicans are against gay marriage. In fact around 40% support gay marriage: http://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/changing-attitudes-on-gay...

And I think using "backward ass beliefs" to describe Republicans seems pretty bigoted to me. It certainly doesn't win over the 40% who do support gay marriage from working with you and it excludes half of the country.

[thatswrong0]

Just because tech doesn't tolerate neo-nazis doesn't mean it's not inclusive. Being inclusive, in my opinion, does not mean that one needs to tolerate every belief and every opinion and treat them as equal. IMO inclusivity has more to do with being accepting of people regardless of their unchangeable aspects (skin color, age, orientation, gender, etc.)

> It certainly doesn't win over the 40% who do support gay marriage from working with you and it excludes half of the country.

We're not trying to convince bigoted people to not be bigoted here. We're trying to cultivate a work place that doesn't discriminate against most people, and that _probably_ means that we can't tolerate certain bigoted beliefs. In my mind, not hiring someone who doesn't like gay people is quite similar to not hiring a jerk.

[gitlabuser]

I'm confused. Are you saying that a company should not hire a Republicans because some Republicans are anti-gay?

The OP called Republicans "backward ass belie[vers]" for not supporting gay marriage. I responded by saying that was a bigoted statement and doesn't make sense because 40% of Republicans do support gay marriage. The OP's larger point was basically that we should shun Republicans because of their "backward ass beliefs". I never mentioned that we should include anti gay workers, I didn't even mention gays. I just said we should be inclusive of Republicans. Are you agreeing with the OP's original assertion that we should shun Republicans?

Let me give another example. I am a male and I am not attracted to overweight / obese females. So I actively discriminate against overweight people in my dating life. It does not affect how I treat overweight people in any other aspect of my life, including my workplace. If I had a public dating profile which says I preferred petite females would that be grounds to not hire me? Or to give another equivalent scenario, if I was a female who discriminated against short males in dating would that be grounds to not hire me? Or to go further, would you think its fine for the tech community to blacklist people who voted for Trump?

There's something deeply troubling to me about going down that rabbit hole. That people can make such blanket statements about an entire political party, esp the party of Abraham Lincoln.

To me as a Bengali, it's no different from my parents stating "Well Pakistanis want us dead. They conducted a genocide of us 50 years ago and they feel no different. Don't cultivate relationships with them"

NO. You don't do that. You judge individuals by the individual. Not by the their political affiliation, not by their race, not by their sexuality, gender, etc.

You don't say "let's not hire this person because they are Republican and Republicans hate gays". You evaluate the individual and if you think the individual would not create a good environment for your gay workers you don't hire them. But you do that regardless of their party. I know plenty of Democrats who are bigoted, racist, or homophobic.

Seriously, this feels like a liberal version of McCarthyism.

[thatswrong0]

> Or to go further, would you think its fine for the tech community to blacklist people who voted for Trump?

It depends. If you wear a MAGA hat to work at this point, I wouldn't mind if you were fired for it. Keep that bigoted shit to yourself. If you wear that hat at this point, you're, in my mind, actively discriminating against certain parts of our population and deserve 0 respect from peers. I would want you out of my workplace. If you voted for him and keep to yourself, whatever. The important part is that all of my coworkers who traditionally have dealt with such discrimination don't have to feel it from you.

The other response to you basically the rest covered my point.

> That people can make such blanket statements about an entire political party, esp the party of Abraham Lincoln.

lol. What does the Republican party of today have in common with the republican party of Abe Lincoln? Seriously, I'd love to hear it. The Republican party of today is so far from what it was even 40 years ago, let alone 150.

> Not by the their political affiliation, not by their race, not by their sexuality, gender, etc.

If you were a member of the neo-nazi party, I would not want you in my workplace either. No political affiliation deserves respect merely because of its existence. If you align yourself with bigots, even if you aren't necessarily one yourself, be prepared to be treated as one.

I say this as someone who is independent; I think both parties suck. But if you're going to be a Republican who thinks that gays shouldn't get married, get the fuck out of my workplace. I don't want you here, and I'd guess most of my coworkers wouldn't want you here either.

[balls187]

You've created a straw man.

The original point was that inclusion means accepting everyone and their beliefs. Regardless of how bigoted they are.

And that is ridiculous.

No one is saying don't hire republicans because they are anti-gay, anti-womens rights, anti-immigrant, anti-abortion, anti-muslim.

What we are saying is that if you have an bigoted opinion (such as homophobia), keep it to yourself, or you will be shunned (in tech).

You want limited government, guns in the classroom, no government medical care, trickle-down economics, fine, we can debate those policies all day long and never agree.

But sorry, no, you can't get to be a bigot and expect us to accept it.

[mistermann]

It's still not at all clear to me if you believe it is possible for a Republican to not hate gays, or if it is possible for you to not hate Republicans.

[balls187]

> In fact around 40% support gay marriage:

So the majority republicans support bigotry. And we should accept that?

[mistermann]

Depending on which poll you believe, a significant portion of Muslims support a whole bunch of unequal policies. Should we accept that? Or is that different?

[Sk1pp]

I think you just helped further the posters first statement.

[gitlabuser]

lol yes, it's comments like this which are a perfect example of why tech is not an inclusive community.

[sqeaky]

Its only as inclusive as the market demands. If someone is poor enough at decision making that will hold non-sense beliefs like hating a group of people because of what they do with their genitals in privacy away from the office, then chances are they didn't have much to contribute to tech.

If someone holds well reasoned and logical beliefs for hating the gay-hater that person can at least suss out some amount of logic.

I am not saying that all homophic are stupid or that all haters of the homophobic are smart, but one of these uses evidence and logic and that correlates at loosely with intelligence.

[balls187]

Brenden Eich felt compelled to step down as Mozilla CEO because he supported a ban on Gay marriage and parts of the tech community criticized him for it (including OkCupid which ran a special banner for Firefox users).

If that means Tech is not inclusive--then you're right.