Gosh. I’m really upset not by the news about Eich as the new CEO, but about learning that such an idol in my life is anti-LGTB. I really hate this kind of situations.
Maybe it would be appropriate to ask him why he was against it before deciding he's anti-LGTB. I'd imagine that, being an intelligent and capable human being, he deserves the consideration of hearing his case before you knock him off the pedestal.
Sadly, he doesn't explain himself at all. He says he has no animosity, but provides no explanation for how such a thing could be done without it.
I imagine he thinks he has a sound, non-hateful reasoning behind his position which will not be taken as such if discussed. In context, I'd guess he's probably wrong about it being sound and non-hateful. Often, being unwilling to discuss one's positions is part of your brain trying to tell the rest of you that you've got it wrong. Not always, obviously, but I'd say it's the way to bet.
In any case, if you're willing to make a public stand on something (and given the political finance laws he donated under, it qualifies as a public stand) then you should be willing to discuss your stand. If he's not willing to discuss it then we don't necessarily have to assume the very best.
Note that the linked-to article explicitly says he's willing to discuss this in private, and Brendan _does_ answer his mail. You're obviously under no obligation to do so, but you if you care to find out what he was thinking you could contact him and ask.
I _do_ wish he were willing to discuss this in public, though. People talking to him one on one obviously doesn't scale.
Likewise. I have, in my naivety, believed that the people I admire for their skill are also fair. For me, I just felt a bit sad to hear that he held these views.