Right on the heels of whining about how Brendan Eich's resignation represents the triumph of "bullying" over free speech - as if those who disagreed with him had no right to voice their own disapproval of his actions - comes news that the very same propagators of the "Brendan Eich is the real victim" nonsense are now pushing to boycott Firefox! So boycotting is bad and anti free-speech when it's directed against bigots, but good when carried out in defense of the prejudiced?
The utter lack of even the slightest pretence at consistency is simply astonishing, and I am now more convinced than ever that the real motivation behind all the nonsensical "Brendan Eich was bullied" rhetoric is raw homophobia, or in the case of people like Andrew Sullivan, cheap contrarianism aimed at eliciting attention and page views. In any case, principle has nothing to do with it.
As an addendum, let me add here that the argument that Brendan Eich's political activities didn't matter as long as he was able to do his job effectively is simply stupid. How could he have possibly been able to do his job effectively when knowledge of his bigotry would have alienated not only users of Mozilla software, but also many of the very people the CEO was supposed to be leading? How many people would argue with a straight face that an active Klansman or Holocaust denier should be allowed to lead a major corporation unchallenged? The only real difference in Eich's case is that, again, those defending him don't really believe in the rights of gays to begin with, which is why they can't see any serious harm in Eich's activities.