[abraininavat]

I disagree with you, but I upvoted you because I assume you're being downvoted because people disagree with you rather than because you're not contributing to the conversation.

You're failing to see a distinction that the rest of us are making. Most of us agree that, in general, a CEO (or any other person) shouldn't be asked to resign by the public based on his ethical and political viewpoints which have nothing to do with his job. We value diversity. Many of us don't agree, however, that a choice to actively contribute to a campaign to rob a whole class of persons of a right enjoyed by others is on par with a choice of political party, religion, ethical framework, etc. This person has actively worked against diversity and for exclusion, and we think that excludes a person from being welcomed in the name of diversity.

You may disagree, but at least try to understand the nuance. Surely your call for diversity has some limit. There must be some line that a person can cross that disqualifies the person from the right to be welcomed. Maybe we just have different lines.