Thumb on the scales

I'm going to comment on a post by Carl Trueman:

http://www.reformation21.org/blog/2014/04/living-and-then-dying-by-the-e.php

The World Vision flip-flop is fascinating for a variety of reasons, perhaps most of all for me because it reveals the problems of parachurch accountability when a non-ecclesiastical group chooses to take a theological stand on something not directly germane to its self-appointed task.  

Why does Trueman constantly resort to this illogical objection to parachurch organizations? If a parachurch organization fails, that's because it lacks an ecclesiastical accountability system. But what about comparable failures on the part of denominations? Is there some reason Trueman is addicted to fallacious arguments? Why does he chronically ignore glaring counterexamples to his strictures? 

When it announced its change in policy on gay marriage among employees, that did not immediately change its humanitarian purpose but did alienate much of its financial base.  That base then mobilized to force a reversal.
The Mozilla situation is similar.  The competence of Brendan Eich to run the company is not affected by his private opinions, despite the usual histrionic attempts to characterize any deviation from the accepted line on same-sex marriage as dangerous bigotry.  Yet a powerful part of the financial base took exception to his views and used their economic muscle to force change on the organization.

Was there in fact a large-scale threat to boycott Mozilla? Are statistics available on the "part of the financial base took exception to his views"? 

Christians should accept that those who live by the sword of legitimate economic sanctions in one context might well find themselves dying by the same legitimate economic sword in another. That is the price, or the risk, of freedom.

Problem with that comparison is that we are not, in fact, in a libertarian environment where free-market forces cut both ways. Rather, gov't has its thumb on the scales. Judges, lawmakers, presidents, governors, and attorney generals weigh in on the side of the homosexual lobby.

Indeed, I've read that it was the IRS which illegally leaked his contribution. So this is not the price of freedom. It's the price of a banana republic.