or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's Tim Cook encourages US House to pass sexual orientation nondiscrimination act
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's Tim Cook encourages US House to pass sexual orientation nondiscrimination act - Page 2

post #41 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post

Some bigots are actually so proud of their ignorance that they tell the victim outright.  There are other ways to ascertain discrimination as well.
really? I'd love to know all the ways you can ascertain someone's intentions. Unless I come right out and say I refuse to hire you because you're gay how can you prove it. Also, I think religious institutions should be able to hire or not hire whomever they want. This will just pave the way for, say, Catholic Churches to be forced to hire gay men as priests.
post #42 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

It is a matter of principle. It would state that officially, in the USA sexual discrimination is a not approved, it is a thing of the past. In the end the discussion comes down to whether a person's sexual orientation is a matter choice. I would argue that anybody who thinks so is basing that on the fact that their own sexual orientation is beyond choice. If not I would dare anybody to chose to change their sexual orientation for a week. Nothing is lost, just one week. Read about another sexual orientation in depth to get to understand what it is all about, then make the decision to be gay, transgender, whatever for a week. 
Why should I do that when I'm perfectly happy as a heterosexual? I'm not obsessed about my sexual orientation like gays and lesbians are.
post #43 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post
 

 

LOL

 

They are choices. Nothing more.

 

The greatest deception of recent times is that homosexuality is like being caucasian, hispanic, asian, etc.

 

It's a complete fallacy. 

 

It's a lifestyle choice. 

 

Not immutable. Not by birth. 

 

I'm sorry, if it's a choice, who would choose it?  Who would choose to face bigotry, have unequal rights etc?

post #44 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post
 

 

You almost never see it. 

 

But what it will do is force Boy Scouts to hire men who shouldn't be over boys. Can you imagine hiring a man to sleep in a tent with young girls? Then why would you hire a gay man to sleep in a tent with young boys? Stupid.

 

To also force churches, whose Bibles teach against homosexuality, to hire homosexuals on staff, completely violating their rights and freedoms.

 

 

Because being Gay and being a Pedophile are not the same thing. Get your facts straight. In that thought pattern, no man should ever be left alone with a girl – their child or not – because we all know some men like to sleep with women and that is just too close for comfort.

Ridiculous. it just highlights a fundamental lack of empathy for other people.

It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
post #45 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Except this concerns basic human rights. It is long overdue and I take my hat off to TC for using his position to encourage decision makers to challenge their own bigotry.

Being hired for a job is not a basic civil right. You don't have a right to a job just because you want one, nor do I have to hire you just because you want one. Your civil liberty is the fact that you have the right to pursue any job you want (freedom) but you don't have the RIGHT to be hired.
post #46 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post
 

 But what makes you think a heavy dude is less deserving of a job than a slender one?

 

Physical health, and also their abilities to carry out the job, depending upon what exactly that job is of course.

 

If somebody is hiring an employee for the longterm, and there are two employees seeking the job with equal qualifications, it makes sense to go with the one who will survive longer, and have less medical issues and take less time off from work.

 

There are many things to consider when hiring somebody, and I believe that everything is fair game, including gender, physical appearance, religion and many other factors. 

post #47 of 245
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

This will just pave the way for, say, Catholic Churches to be forced to hire gay men as priests.

 

But... but... at one point the Catholic church ITSELF encouraged gay men to become priests!  

post #48 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttollerton View Post


Being hired for a job is not a basic civil right. You don't have a right to a job just because you want one, nor do I have to hire you just because you want one. Your civil liberty is the fact that you have the right to pursue any job you want (freedom) but you don't have the RIGHT to be hired.

No you don't have a right to have a job just because you want one, but you should have the right to be judged for that job fairly, based on things you can control rather than things that have no bearing on job performance that you can't.

post #49 of 245
Why does it matter whether it's a choice? Religion is a choice, but I'm forbidden from discriminating against people who believe in nonsense and disbelieve science (ie Christians)
post #50 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario View Post
 


I am a long time citizen and it troubles me when Christian bigots use their political position to push their religious agenda on everyone (remember, religion is now debunked bunch of bronze age lies).

 

My how tolerant and accepting your are of people with different beliefs than you. I’m assuming you would fire any Christians working for you if you were their boss? Would you advise them not to attend church if they wanted to keep their jobs?

post #51 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

If somebody is hiring an employee for the longterm, and there are two employees seeking the job with equal qualifications, it makes sense to go with the one who will survive longer, and have less medical issues and take less time off from work.

 

There are many things to consider when hiring somebody, and I believe that everything is fair game, including gender, physical appearance, religion and many other factors. 

 

Fortunately, your beliefs are not the law.  In fact, the law (and common sense, fairness, and dignity) dictate that you cannot discriminate against people for these reasons!  By your standard, Apple should have fired S. Jobs at the first sign of illness.  

post #52 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post
 

 

LOL

 

They are choices. Nothing more.

 

The greatest deception of recent times is that homosexuality is like being caucasian, hispanic, asian, etc.

 

It's a complete fallacy. 

 

It's a lifestyle choice. 

 

Not immutable. Not by birth. 

 

Pure ignorance. Tell that to kids offing themselves because the can't be who people want them to be. That they can't "fake straight" without hating themselves every minute of their lives. It's selfish and deplorable to make someone be someone else just to make YOU comfortable. Being an employer doesn't give you the right to dictate someone's identity. It' great that you have you all figured out – fantastic – some aren't hat lucky and have their own life they also need to figure out. No one is telling you to stop being you, just don't think you have a valid opinion on who some one else should be.

It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
post #53 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeaEarleGreyHot View Post
 

 

Fortunately, your beliefs are not the law.  In fact, the law (and common sense, fairness, and dignity) dictate that you cannot discriminate against people for these reasons!  By your standard, Apple should have fired S. Jobs at the first sign of illness.  

 

I am aware that it is not the law. I was merely stating what I believe. I don't always agree with all laws of course, and I also don't always follow all laws.

post #54 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post

Why does it matter whether it's a choice? Religion is a choice, but I'm forbidden from discriminating against people who believe in nonsense and disbelieve science (ie Christians)

You realize, of course, that the primary mathematician/physicist who proposed the big bang theory was a Belgian Roman Catholic priest by the name of Monseigneur Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître. Funny how you lump all Christians into one stereotype but bristle at anyone doing the same to your favorite group. The so-called tolerance of the left is beyond the pale of hypocrisy. 

post #55 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

No you don't have a right to have a job just because you want one, but you should have the right to be judged for that job fairly, based on things you can control rather than things that have no bearing on job performance that you can't.

I struggle with that word "should." "Should" implies an entitlement. I, again, go back to the fundamental belief that our only true civil right is freedom. We can be whoever we want to be, but we can't force others' behavior. Government is not effective enforcer of morality and it's hard to legislate morality.

Make no mistake, I am not one who would discriminate against a homosexual during a job interview, but this legislation is not going to be helpful.
post #56 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Why should I do that when I'm perfectly happy as a heterosexual? I'm not obsessed about my sexual orientation like gays and lesbians are.

Only if you were of the opinion that sexual orientation is a matter of choice. If you are not then equality under the law should be non-problematic, non?

post #57 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanimal View Post
 

How about we just do away with discrimination altogether - Including not discriminating against people like a certain CEO who ended up resigning just two weeks after he was hired? Does anyone else sense the double standard?

 

No, and it goes to the heart of the definition of bigotry.

 

Brendan Eich spent money not on his beliefs, but to impose his beliefs on others.  He was unaccepting of the beliefs of others (bigotry).  He wasn't forced to resign because he didn't want to gay marry (that would've been bigotry and thus a double standard).

 

Brendan Eich was forced to resign because there were enough people like me who looked at it like this... He's free to not gay marry.  He's even free to hate gays all he wants.  However, when he spends money to impose his beliefs on others who don't share his beliefs in a way that has no impact on him whatsoever other than his disapproval of their beliefs, then there's an issue of where that money comes from.

 

In this situation, Brendan Eich was getting money from Mozilla.  The use of Firefox by us meant that money would be available to be given to Brendan Eich, who would not state that he wouldn't contribute to a prop 8 like campaign again.  Thus there was a direct connection:

 

Use Firefox -> Mozilla gets money -> money goes to Brendan Eich -> Brendan Eich spends money on anti-gay campaigns.

 

I, and many others, didn't want to use Firefox knowing this direct chain would happen.  Mozilla saw the impact of this and had a long talk with Brendan Eich resulting in his resignation.

 

Now, I know in reality the bigger issue was likely that Google threatened to pull funding, which accounts for 90% of Mozilla's revenue, but those at Google were doing this for the same reason (as well as fear of secondary boycotting of Google products and services).

post #58 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamacguy View Post

This is so stupid... Apple needs to stay out of personal politics. I can't figure out where gays are discriminated against? I'm about sick and tired of the .05% tail wagging the dog. If you want to be an AIDS risk then do it, but you don't need to shout it from the rooftops.

Ten years ago everybody was saying marriage was on out-dated, obsolete institution. Now everybody wants in on it. WTF? I liked it better when liberals hated marriage.

I don't care if you are gay or straight. Shut up about sex in the workplace and do your job. Then we won't have any issues, sexual harassment, orientation or otherwise.

No... I'm not homophobic... I just don't like them.

 

As it says above, there 28 states where it is legal to be fired for being gay. I believe that is discrimination, if you were looking for one example. Also, it's not .05% it's actually more like 4%, so around 8 Million Americans (source). Also, reports have highschoolers as high as 13% due to better understanding of peer-groups and less of a need to be closeted (hence, identifying). If you truly want an AIDS risk, be straight in the continent of Africa, or Brazil, or many other places unprotected sex is religiously supported. You are dealing in old stereotypes, my friend.
 

It's not just about "being" married, it is also what it mean. Equality. Not to be kicked out of a hospital room, denyed coverage, benefits or support and – in the off chance it doesn't work out (like many straight marriages as well) – legal president when dealing with assets and more importantly, the children by which ever what they became part of the family.

 

Gay people don't want to talk about sex at work, most are scared and would rather leave their private life at home. The problem is that they don't have the freedom to be relaxed about their private life as I would. I could say, when prompted by a co-worker about my weekend plans, That my wife and I have a date and we'll be going out. If someone who was gay was in the same position, they open themselves up to get fired. Having pictures up or anything you identify with your loving home life can end you employment. That is not equality. If I can not fire someone for not liking black people, how is it fair that I can fire someone for knowing they go home to another man? And be honest about that thought.

 

You don't have to like them – I work with people I don't like, and probably for better reasons than you have for not liking Gays, but that is not a reason to allow a legal way to fire them. This is a modern society and we should be beyond that by now.

It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
post #59 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mario View Post


I am a long time citizen and it troubles me when Christian bigots use their political position to push their religious agenda on everyone (remember, religion is now debunked bunch of bronze age lies).


Hateful much? Don't lump all Christians together. Besides, have you been to the Middle East? Where is your Muslim hate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

... You see because they're all for free speech so long as it's speech they agree with.

Ain't that the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ned bulous View Post

Why does it matter whether it's a choice? Religion is a choice, but I'm forbidden from discriminating against people who believe in nonsense and disbelieve science (ie Christians)

Don't lump all Christians as one group. That's being a bigot as well.
post #60 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

I disagree with Tim Cook.

 

I don't have any problems with hiring a gay person of course, if they were the best qualified for the job, that is what's important. But I would most likely have to pass on hiring any sexually confused people. Those people should go work for FB, since FB has a gazillion different choices for gender. What a joke. And no, you don't get to choose that you are a female or something else, if you actually have male sexual organs. You are what you are. If somebody goes around and really wishes that they were a hippopotamus, that doesn't make it so, no matter how much they wish that they were. People are what they are. There are probably thousands of lunatics in various mental asylums that think that they're Napoleon. 

 

I'm being charitable when I say that your rant reads like that of a poorly-educated bigot.  You contradicted yourself in the first two sentences by basically asserting that most of the time jobs should be filled based on merit, except when you feel like discriminating against someone based on sexual orientation.  "Trust me guys, I'm not really a racist/bigot, but we need to discriminate along these lines because ...."  You're not fooling anyone.

post #61 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

My how tolerant and accepting your are of people with different beliefs than you. I’m assuming you would fire any Christians working for you if you were their boss? Would you advise them not to attend church if they wanted to keep their jobs?

 


Why should ignorance be respected? When you have over 50% of the population who literally believes in the creationism, that deny the scientific facts like evolution, that don't want science taught in schools, that support unjust policies in the middle east because they think it is a per-requisite for Armageddon and return of Jesus, when you have politicians saying things like we don't need environmental policy because Jesus is coming back to earth within 50 years, so who cares what happens to the earth anyway, when you have people literally wishing for the end of the world to come as soon as possible (if they saw mushroom clouds they would literally rejoice because the best thing that can happen to them has started to happen, i.e. return of Jesus).

 

This love affair with ignorance is getting out of hand, and the future of the entire civilization is at stake. It's time to stop being so damn polite and respectful of ignorance and delusions and it's time we pointed out at every opportunity about what we do know, that all religions are man made inventions.

 

Sure everyone is entitled to an opinion. But is it worth anything. Is it supported by evidence/reason? If the opinion is wrong, then it should be pointed out and if it is outrageously wrong, then also ridiculed (because that's when it's expressed with most conviction). To be knowledgeable on a particular subject is precisely to exclude certain wrong views from consideration. And religion is so wrong on so many levels.

 

Religious people have a really hard time with this one. You have the right to believe any old superstition, but the rest of us have the right to tell you are absolutely stupid for doing so. This religious entitlement and protection has to stop.

Mac Pro, 8 Core, 32 GB RAM, nVidia GTX 285 1 GB, 2 TB storage, 240 GB OWC Mercury Extreme SSD, 30'' Cinema Display, 27'' iMac, 24'' iMac, 17'' MBP, 13'' MBP, 32 GB iPhone 4, 64 GB iPad 3

Reply

Mac Pro, 8 Core, 32 GB RAM, nVidia GTX 285 1 GB, 2 TB storage, 240 GB OWC Mercury Extreme SSD, 30'' Cinema Display, 27'' iMac, 24'' iMac, 17'' MBP, 13'' MBP, 32 GB iPhone 4, 64 GB iPad 3

Reply
post #62 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


I rarely see ignorant bigotry on AI.

Here's hoping you don't post a lot of it.

Realize that you are asking this guy never to post here again. That is not going to happen.

post #63 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by websnap View Post
 

 

As it says above, there 28 states where it is legal to be fired for being gay. I believe that is discrimination, if you were looking for one example. Also, it's not .05% it's actually more like 4%, so around 8 Million Americans (source). Also, reports have highschoolers as high as 13% due to better understanding of peer-groups and less of a need to be closeted (hence, identifying). If you truly want an AIDS risk, be straight in the continent of Africa, or Brazil, or many other places unprotected sex is religiously supported. You are dealing in old stereotypes, my friend.
 

It's not just about "being" married, it is also what it mean. Equality. Not to be kicked out of a hospital room, denyed coverage, benefits or support and – in the off chance it doesn't work out (like many straight marriages as well) – legal president when dealing with assets and more importantly, the children by which ever what they became part of the family.

 

Gay people don't want to talk about sex at work, most are scared and would rather leave their private life at home. The problem is that they don't have the freedom to be relaxed about their private life as I would. I could say, when prompted by a co-worker about my weekend plans, That my wife and I have a date and we'll be going out. If someone who was gay was in the same position, they open themselves up to get fired. Having pictures up or anything you identify with your loving home life can end you employment. That is not equality. If I can not fire someone for not liking black people, how is it fair that I can fire someone for knowing they go home to another man? And be honest about that thought.

 

You don't have to like them – I work with people I don't like, and probably for better reasons than you have for not liking Gays, but that is not a reason to allow a legal way to fire them. This is a modern society and we should be beyond that by now.

So when people are allowed to come out of the closet we are really looking at more like a 10% gay ratio...

post #64 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post
 

 

LOL

 

They are choices. Nothing more.

 

The greatest deception of recent times is that homosexuality is like being caucasian, hispanic, asian, etc.

 

It's a complete fallacy.

 

It's a lifestyle choice.

 

Not immutable. Not by birth.

I cannot speak to gender identity as I have no personal experience with it, however, as a homosexual, I can tell you it was not a choice for me.  I didn't choose to be gay any more than you chose to be straight (if indeed that is the implied case).  I can't imagine anyone "choosing" to be gay and having to accept all the negativity that goes along with it from people like you.  It's insulting to read a post such as this and hear someone speak of something they obviously know nothing about or have any personal experience with.  It's equivalent to saying someone chose to be black or to be a woman or what color hair they have.

 

The only fallacy here is your ignorance.

post #65 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdonisSMU View Post
 

So when people are allowed to come out of the closet we are really looking at more like a 10% gay ratio...

 

Honestly? Who knows. Could be more. I know a lot of people who are fluid, love who they love but if they get married to the opposite gender consider themselves straight. Yet if the situation arose a few years earlier could have gotten fired for who they were dating. I think the idea is that we stand up for the little guy, you know? 25%, 10%, .5%. It should be the reason, not the ratio – and the reason just is not good enough. I think Fat people doing it is "icky" too, but they shouldn't get fired from their jobs because we know they go home and have sex.

It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
post #66 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Liberals have no problem with discrimination. They had no problem with the Mozilla CEO being forced out because of his personal beliefs on gay marriage. But if, say, another company forced out an executive because they supported gay marriage liberals would be enraged. You see because they're all for free speech so long as it's speech they agree with.

 

And now they’re going after Dropbox for hiring Condoleezza Rice, former Secretary of State. As you point out, agree with them or suffer the consequences. I wonder how many of the AI lefties are canceling their Dropbox accounts? How many have deleted the Firefox browser because Mozilla dared to hire the inventor of Javascript as CEO? Heck, how many have turned off Javascript in their browsers? Wouldn’t want to use anything made by a hater bigot would you.

 

Think and say what they want you to think and say OR ELSE. The “choice” is yours, hardy har har.

post #67 of 245
Hey Tim - how about a little less politics and little more amazing products?
We don't need another Sheryl Sandberg.
 
Where's the new Apple TV?
 
 
(So Y is the new X?   Zzzzzzzzzz......)
Reply
 
Where's the new Apple TV?
 
 
(So Y is the new X?   Zzzzzzzzzz......)
Reply
post #68 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

And now they’re going after Dropbox for hiring Condoleezza Rice, former Secretary of State. 

 

What else would you expect from a bunch of racist and intolerant liberals?

post #69 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

And now they’re going after Dropbox for hiring Condoleezza Rice, former Secretary of State. As you point out, agree with them or suffer the consequences. I wonder how many of the AI lefties are canceling their Dropbox accounts? How many have deleted the Firefox browser because Mozilla dared to hire the inventor of Javascript as CEO? Heck, how many have turned off Javascript in their browsers? Wouldn’t want to use anything made by a hater bigot would you.

 

Think and say what they want you to think and say OR ELSE. The “choice” is yours, hardy har har.

I've deleted Firefox as a result, as it happens.

 

I don't agree with Brendan Eich's position, but I don't think he should have been forced out.

 

Sadly, his example will now be used by, I don't know, Hobby Lobby, to force out a CEO if he turns out to be gay.

post #70 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post
 

I've deleted Firefox as a result, as it happens.

 

I don't agree with Brendan Eich's position, but I don't think he should have been forced out.

 

Sadly, his example will now be used by, I don't know, Hobby Lobby, to force out a CEO if he turns out to be gay.

You didn’t answer the question about Javascript did you. Why haven’t you tuned it off? Of course that would make your online experience a little difficult wouldn’t it? Being selective in your outrage?

post #71 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post
 

 

I'm sorry, if it's a choice, who would choose it?  Who would choose to face bigotry, have unequal rights etc?

 

All I know is I never made a choice to be heterosexual. I knew it from the day my sexual feelings started to stir. I’m convinced homosexuality is not a choice either. Science is still studying the issue but my own life experience tells me it’s they way you are born. 

post #72 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post
 

I've deleted Firefox as a result, as it happens.

 

I don't agree with Brendan Eich's position, but I don't think he should have been forced out.

 

Sadly, his example will now be used by, I don't know, Hobby Lobby, to force out a CEO if he turns out to be gay.

 

Exactly, what goes around comes around.  Hypocrisy abounds on all sides. We are all hypocrites and sinners in one way or the other. Oh wait, that’s a religious thought isn’t it. Sorry, my bad.

post #73 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

You didn’t answer the question about Javascript did you. Why haven’t you tuned it off? Of course that would make your online experience a little difficult wouldn’t it? Being selective in your outrage?

No, I'm not selective in my outrage at all.  I am, however, practical about what action I can take to air my displeasure.  If I stop using Javascript, it will be an extreme negative to me, and will not impact Mozilla at all.  If I stop using Firefox, it will impact Mozilla (since they won't get any click through payments from Google anymore).


I think he's been treated incredibly badly by an organization (Mozilla) who he worked for for over a decade, with never a question of him discriminating against anyone in his professional life.  If, when he become CEO, he had immediately started chasing policies that discriminated against LGBT members of the Mozilla staff, I would have shouted for him to be dismissed immediately.  But he didn't.

post #74 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

I rarely see ignorant bigotry on AI.

Here's hoping you don't post a lot of it.

You're joking, right? This is Apple ][. Any non-Apple post from his is almost guaranteed to fall under that category. My last ban was due to me calling him out for what he is, I think in that particular case he was bashing Muslims, or spitting on Mandela and calling him a terrorist.
post #75 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post
 

 

All I know is I never made a choice to be heterosexual. I knew it from the day my sexual feelings started to stir.

 

And this is how my gay friends feel. We don't all have the same life, feelings and experiences. You don't need to feel them, but you also don't need to devalue them.

 

Quote:
Science is still studying the issue but my own life experience tells me it’s they way you are born.

 

The way you were born, but that is not the same for everyone else. Just because that's how you are doesn't mean everyone else shares it. We don't all date the same people.

It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
post #76 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post

You almost never see it. 

But what it will do is force Boy Scouts to hire men who shouldn't be over boys. Can you imagine hiring a man to sleep in a tent with young girls? Then why would you hire a gay man to sleep in a tent with young boys? Stupid.

To also force churches, whose Bibles teach against homosexuality, to hire homosexuals on staff, completely violating their rights and freedoms.

WOW! If you believe that because a person is gay that they are then guaranteed to be sexual predators, then you live in Fantasy World!

Also, on your point about churches and their freedoms, being a church does not give you the right to promote intolerance because you have chosen ONE topic out of the Bible that you feel is against God. Have you ever eaten pork? Shellfish? Known someone who got remarried after being divorced, or whom had sex before they were married? Because the Bible also states that those behaviors are sins. The point of a church is to show acceptance and love for ALL of God's children. PLEASE let go of the fantasy that people CHOOSE to be gay. It is genetic. Plain and simple. I am a Christian and am sickened every time someone uses God as a pulpit to spout bigotry, hate, and hypocrisy.

Also, WHENEVER you state that people who are gay are therefore not entitled to the same considerations and opportunities as you, you are DENYING THEIR RIGHTS AS PEOPLE. GTFOH.
post #77 of 245
Are people still hung up on whether sexuality is a choice??

It's not. And some of us (from other parts of the world) GET that implicitly, and have moved way past it years ago.

smh
post #78 of 245
75 comments on this topic? I'm afraid to read the comments. 1hmm.gif

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #79 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post

What makes you think so? Every US enterprise depends on talent from all over the world, and making the environment less hostile will attract more talented people. This should be in everybody's best interest (besides being the right thing in the first place).

What you said is correct, this is my issue with it however:

If Tim Cook feels that way then as the CEO of Apple why doesn't he just mandate that Apple have that type of work environment? Why does it also have to be that everybody else outside of Apple have to mandate that at their own private companies do the same if they do not hold his view or beliefs? I don't understand this leftist ideology that says" everybody must do as I do in order for me to feel good about my own personal convictions." If Tim Cook feels that way the he should just worry about Apple and make that be the case for Apple. I'm not an advocate for big government stripping away the rights of private citizens.
post #80 of 245
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

75 comments on this topic? I'm afraid to read the comments. 1hmm.gif

You don't have to. I think you already know who and what. And seriously, its not worth it. I should have let it sail by but.... aarrrrghhh, DOH!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's Tim Cook encourages US House to pass sexual orientation nondiscrimination act