I just think political differences should not cause people to fired. That could get out of control fast.
You don't do your argument any favors by acting as if there's not this qualitative difference between the head spokesman of a company and just any other employee.
It's not just because he's CEO though, separating work and home used to be a basic part of professionalism but we've lost it from all levels.
I think before you automatically assume this is a good thing, you may want to look into what this statement means and what it actually mapped out to historically. Because the time when this was what professionalism meant likely was also the time when certain people had to use different bathrooms.
I.e., it worked, because all of the "problem" segments have already been excluded, and so nobody had to deal with it. There is no problem with being a sexist manager if no women work under you, or if your actions are not perceived as problematic. Pretty easy to keep it "professional", because the definition is already skewed in your favor.
I work with several religious people (varying religions) who think I deserve to burn in hell for all eternity for various reasons, which is quite a severe level of hatred if you think about it. Yet it doesn't impact the professional relationship.
> Because the time when this was what professionalism meant likely was also the time when certain people had to use different bathrooms.
This hasn't disappeared either, gender segregated toilets are still common along with disabled toilets.
Either the relationship is professional, meaning that the associated -ism didn't exist, or that relationship was not as professional as you were imagining it. People do not arbitrarily turn off their prejudices when they enter a workplace.
> I work with several religious people (varying religions) who think I deserve to burn in hell for all eternity for various reasons, which is quite a severe level of hatred if you think about it. Yet it doesn't impact the professional relationship.
This only works because said religious people are too underpowered for the concreteness of their beliefs to be practical, so they don't really believe it on a significant level, and it doesn't make any difference. That relationship was certainly not professional when Christianity was at its power peak. Modern Christianity is very, very contradictory, has become so to survive, it's not really a good example.
What I am saying is, if there is a significant negative belief in someone's address, that relationship cannot be professional. If a manager thinks women are below him, there is no way he can be professional in his interactions with them, it just doesn't work.
CEO's actions in this case supported a law that very much reached into the homes and lives of some employees, customers, etc.