or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Inc. employees pass out free iTunes song cards at San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple, Inc. employees pass out free iTunes song cards at San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade - Page 5

post #161 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post
 

procreate |ˈprōkrēˌātverb [ no obj. ](of people or animals) produce young; reproduce: species that procreate by copulation.

Showing me something from dictionary.com doesn't tell me what point you are trying to make

post #162 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

I don't have a problem with Apple making their products as recyclable as possible. But I don't agree with certain other positions that liberals often hold on environmental issues, such as "global warming", nuclear power, drilling for oil etc.

 

That's fine - what I mean is, there might be specific disagreements about policy approaches or whatever, but generally there are things on which most people tend to agree (for example, most people in the world agree that some sort of response is required to tackle climate change - but people disagree wildly on what that response should actually be).

 

In this case though, Apple is generally supporting civil rights based on fairly common shared values. That need not be controversial.

 

And even if it is controversial for some, then my earlier comment was suggesting that those people have bigger problems than Apple: it is likely that they are coming into conflict with most of the population on some issues. In that context, it makes little sense to criticise Apple, given that it is reflecting what is an increasingly mainstream view (even if a specific person disagrees with that increasingly mainstream view).

post #163 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingsoc View Post
 

 

That's fine - what I mean is, there might be specific disagreements about policy approaches or whatever, but generally there are things on which most people tend to agree (for example, most people in the world agree that some sort of response is required to tackle climate change - but people disagree wildly on what that response should actually be).

 

In this case though, Apple is generally supporting civil rights based on fairly common shared values. That need not be controversial.

 

And even if it is controversial for some, then my earlier comment was suggesting that those people have bigger problems than Apple: it is likely that they are coming into conflict with most of the population on some issues. In that context, it makes little sense to criticise Apple, given that it is reflecting what is an increasingly mainstream view (even if a specific person disagrees with that increasingly mainstream view).

 

I disagree with Apple from time to time, but I also agree with them far more often than I disagree with them.

 

And even though I might disagree with Apple on a few issues, it's obviously not that huge of an issue to me, because I wouldn't own any Apple shares if it were.

post #164 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

I agree, which is precisely why I find it strange that some people try to give me a hard time, merely because they don't agree with my politics.

 

I like Apple, and that's all the reason that I need to be on this site.

That goes both ways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

I am pro death penalty.

I think life in prison is worse.

 

I am anti-abortion (not for religious reasons, I am not religious.) But this issue is not really that big of a deal, as it is mostly liberals that are being aborted, so I am ok with that.

 

Does that give me the right to tell someone else how to live their life? It's not illegal.

Even if you were religious...aren't those decisions Gods? I think it's quite arrogant to tell people "I know what God thinks".

 

I am pro marijuana.

Your choice. Smoke em if you got em.

 

I am anti-illegals.

We are a country of immigrants. So we need some kind of comprehensive solutions.

 

I am pro American supremacy.

Not sure what you mean by this.

 

I am anti-third world religious dictatorships.

Who isn't. Being the world's police...that's another issue.

 

I am pro first amendment and pro second amendment.

No issue here but there are limitations to both. "You can't run into a crowded theatre & yell fire"

 

I am pro capitalism.

Not at the expense of Democracy. Capitalism is not a form of government. A free market doesn't mean you have no rules. I have to follow laws, so should corporations. Working people also need a seat at the table. Ideas do not usually trickle down the usually trickle up. CEOs are not the only people in corporations that make a contribution to the well being of a company.

 

I am anti-socialist.

Including subsidies to corporations which is a form of socialism. I do believe in public education which is a form of socialism. Social Security, I have paid into this my whole life. I do not trust Wallstreet. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them

 

I am anti-communist.

who isn't?

 

I am anti-nazis.

again, who isn't?

 

I am anti-Political correctness.

 

I could go on, but you get the idea.

"I am anti-abortion (not for religious reasons, I am not religious.) But this issue is not really that big of a deal, as it is mostly liberals that are being aborted, so I am ok with that."

Remarks like his is probably why you get so much flak. It's not about being politically correct. It's human nature to attack when being attacked. I have never read a post of yours that attacks conservatism or calls them names. I could be wrong. Who doesn't believe in FREE SPEECH. That doesn't mean that everyone agrees with everything that is said. I don't know anyone & have never met anyone that I 100% agee with on well, everything. That doesn't mean that we don't get along at all. That's just life.


Edited by Splif - 6/30/14 at 8:21pm
post #165 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post
 

Showing me something from dictionary.com doesn't tell me what point you are trying to make

Nevermind. I thought you had used the word in an earlier post that didn't line up with the actual meaning of the word.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post
 

I'm an independent so I will give this a shot. I disagree with conservatives when it come to war. The US has a bad habit of trying to police the world and attempt to create democracy. We need to worry about our country and stay out of others business. My one exception if people in another country need humanitarian relief due do a disaster, then we should help as much as possible.

 

I agree & also if there is a direct threat to our national security.

 

What bothers me from the liberal side has everything to do with the economy. Only half of our population pays federal taxes, we have the lowest employment participation rate in 35 years. We have 47 million americans in poverty and the same on food stamps. We need to get our shit together and get the government out of the free market private sector. 

 

Why do you think these economic issues were caused by Democrats? I would argue this is the result of Reaganomics & trickle down economics. Manufacturing jobs have been outsourced. Not everyone has the privilege of being able to afford college. I work as a Graphic artist...my job was outsourced to India. Why are companies that move jobs overseas rewarded with tax cuts & subsidies? How much of half the public that pays federal taxes is retired, pays income taxes & state taxes, is in the military etc., etc., it's a bogus statistic. Some reasonable changes have to be made on the governments end in the private sector but no rules or regulations is insane. We are living through the results of that now. We all have to abide by laws & rules.

 

Immigration reform. Conservatives need to make peace with the fact we have 12 million people in the country that are illegal. There is no way in hell we are going to deport them so lets make it work so we can make them productive and get them on the books to pay taxes. If they haven't committed a crime then I don't see a reason to try and waste money on something we can't fix. 

 

Yup.

 

For both parties get your shit together with border patrol. Lets use our military for that instead of sending them all over the world for no good reason. 

 

There has never been more funds allocated to border security than there have been under this president. There have never been more deportations. The border will never be 100% secure. So what are the metrics for the Republicans that will constitute secure?

 

The big topic of this thread, social issues. Either make gay marriage legal or define it as two people of the opposite sex. I don't agree with gay marriage that is my point of view. If it became a federal law that was defined I certainly would't think about it or honestly even care. It's not my battle. I have stated my opinion but that doesn't mean others have to agree with it, and I respect their opinion when they can present it without flipping out. 

 

Looking at this from the point of view of freedom & liberty for all; doesn't mean you have to agree with it. Liberty & freedom mean different things to different people. I don't agree with Nazis on anything, yet they constitutionally have the right to free speech & assembly.

 

I could go on with healthcare but this post would be 10 pages long. Healthcare for everyone really should be this hard or that much of an issue, we are the richest country in the world.

 

Agree.

 

So not exactly extreme posts of view. 


Edited by Splif - 6/30/14 at 8:39pm
post #166 of 197

as a public service, i am uploading more or less the entire san francisco parade to tpb.

 

its 3 hours 31 minutes long

720x400

 

i do not know if i am allowed to include a link so you will have to find it yourselves.

post #167 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post
 

Race is not the same thing as ethnicity. As you sited an Englishman & an Irishman are from different ethnic groups or nationality. They belong to the same race - caucasian. So what you are trying to explain as the meaning of the word race is not the meaning of the word, anywhere.

 

Sorry but to be polite, you are as wrong as can be on the matter.

 

Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. First used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations, in the 17th century, people began to use the term to relate to observable physical traits. Such use promoted hierarchies favorable to differing ethnic groups. Starting from the 19th century, the term was often used, in a taxonomic sense, to denote genetically differentiated human populations defined by phenotype.[1][2][3]

 

It goes on much deeper within the article but the point is the word is used in an array of ways, just as I indicated.

 

As anthropologists and other evolutionary scientists have shifted away from the language of race to the term population to talk about genetic differences, historians, cultural anthropologists and other social scientists re-conceptualized the term "race" as a cultural category or social construct—a particular way that some people talk about themselves and others. Many social scientists have replaced the word race with the word "ethnicity" to refer to self-identifying groups based on beliefs concerning shared culture, ancestry and history.

 

So not to be an asshole but please give it a read to inform yourself.

 

Quote:
 Isn't taking the ball home pretty much what Hobby Lobby wants? This ruling is going to have implications for years to come.

Abortion & contraception are not illegal regardless of your religious point of view. You have the right to not practice those things because of your religious point of view. Who has an issue with that? What about the employees rights or their religious points of view? Are they paying for any of this healthcare plan? 

Evangelical Christians have long argued that life begins at conception, and therefore that medical procedures that disrupt the first stages of pregnancy amount to murder. In the case of Hobby Lobby, this extends to a woman taking pills such as Plan B, Next Choice or Ella, any of which would prevent her ovaries from releasing an egg that could be fertilized after unprotected sex. Yet they have no issue with Viagra or vasectomies.

 

What exactly have I been Hypocritical about?

 

Not at all. The ruling may have implications but only because the Constitution has implications. Abortion and contraception haven't become illegal because of this ruling. The company is paying for the health care plan. If they weren't then the court would have found that the company was without standing before the court.

 

You say they have no problem with Viagra or vasectomies. The objection isn't about sex or preventing pregnancy. They also have no issues with condoms, birth control pills, etc. The issue is about murder.

 

The ruling doesn't prevent the government from providing any and all services. The employees are not preventing from exercising their right to services or having someone pay for them who is not Hobby Lobby.

 

Explain for example how the government can provide subsidies for medical plans but not for contraception? How can someone apply for Blue Cross and get $400 back a month for it from the government but the government can't provide a subsidy or deliver cash for a contraceptive service provided privately?

 

That is what the court found for and it is right.

 

It is hypocritical because Apple can support a fundamental right and devote money towards it but Hobby Lobby can't in your view. Apple as a corporation does not have to remain neutral which is what many in this thread are advocating they do. Yet you demand Hobby Lobby do what you would not require of Apple.

 

I'm consistent. Apple and Tim Cook can push for marriage rights. Hobby Lobby can push for their religious rights. They are both fundamental rights per the Constitution.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #168 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

I am anti-abortion (not for religious reasons, I am not religious.) But this issue is not really that big of a deal, as it is mostly liberals that are being aborted, so I am ok with that.

If you're anti-abortion, that's fine. Just don't have one. What gives you the right to tell women what to do with their bodies?

 

I am anti-third world religious dictatorships.

Apparently, you are also pro religious dictatorships on American soil.

 

I am anti-socialist.

You don't even know or understand the meaning of the word. You're repeating what you heard on the radio. You couldn't even explain what it is without first looking it up in a dictionary.

 

I am anti-nazis.

What a cutting-edge, progressive position. Do you expect praise for this enlightened position?

 

I could go on, but you get the idea.

Yes, we do. You're the result of the dumbing down of the American education system. A complete ignoramus, an uneducated buffoon proud of his stupidity and shouting out loud "USA! USA! USA!". Depressing.

post #169 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

I'm consistent. Apple and Tim Cook can push for marriage rights. Hobby Lobby can push for their religious rights. They are both fundamental rights per the Constitution.

Apple and Tim Cook are not pushing their views on their employees. When Apple added health coverage to domestic partners years ago, and when they took position against prop 8, it didn't take anything away from their straight or religious employees. What Hobby Lobby does pushes the religious values of the owners onto its 13,000 employees, and it's disgusting. There is no fundamental constitutional right for a company to have religious views and use them to bypass the laws in order to withhold benefits to their employees. Corporations are not people. But this supreme court is a disgrace, and Alito is a pig.

post #170 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJohnWhorfin View Post

If you're anti-abortion, that's fine. Just don't have one. What gives you the right to tell women what to do with their bodies?

 

As long as wannabe totalitarian liberals are constantly attempting to pass silly laws governing what other people can and can not do, which is none of their business at all, and since I am a believer in fairness, and since this is not a one way street, then i believe that my view on certain things is equally as valid as theirs, and is fully deserving of being implemented.

 

Abortion is just not a very civilized thing to do, and since I am a civilized person, I am of course opposed to it. I just don't think that it's a cool thing to do, to murder your fetus. The people who've done it should surely feel pretty bad about themselves, and they deserve to.

 

Apparently, you are also pro religious dictatorships on American soil.

 

I am not at all. I don't even like many of the so-called Christian Conservative politicians and their moronic stances on many issues. If you can call anti-liberalism a religion, then sure, I am in favor of that kind of religious dictatorship. It sure beats a liberal dictatorship.

 

You don't even know or understand the meaning of the word. You're repeating what you heard on the radio. You couldn't even explain what it is without first looking it up in a dictionary.

 

You have no idea what I know or don't know. You're obviously a very immature person, and I usually wouldn't take any time out of my day to converse with such a lowly specimen such as yourself, so you should feel extremely privileged that I am even bothering replying to you, and I will keep it short by simply saying that you are incorrect, as in dead wrong.

 

Yes, we do. You're the result of the dumbing down of the American education system. A complete ignoramus, an uneducated buffoon proud of his stupidity and shouting out loud "USA! USA! USA!". Depressing.

 

You are clearly the uneducated person here. An immature person who is too dumb to obey forum rules, as you are violating them by engaging in a childish personal attack. You sound exactly like a typical, low information liberal, one who is ignorant, one who is obviously not very well educated or well mannered, and you come across as a little chihuahua, all bark and no bite.  I will not waste any more of my time responding to a poster which I have just designated to be a worthless specimen, and I hereby officially command that you are to be aborted from my sight, so off you go to the ignore list.

post #171 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJohnWhorfin View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

I'm consistent. Apple and Tim Cook can push for marriage rights. Hobby Lobby can push for their religious rights. They are both fundamental rights per the Constitution.

Apple and Tim Cook are not pushing their views on their employees. When Apple added health coverage to domestic partners years ago, and when they took position against prop 8, it didn't take anything away from their straight or religious employees. What Hobby Lobby does pushes the religious values of the owners onto its 13,000 employees, and it's disgusting. There is no fundamental constitutional right for a company to have religious views and use them to bypass the laws in order to withhold benefits to their employees. Corporations are not people. But this supreme court is a disgrace, and Alito is a pig.

 

Stop trolling. The company doesn't have the religious views. The owners have them and are being mandated to take private actions with their private company. The government should do it's job and it's job is to provide contraception if that is what it decrees the population should have rather than mandating a company take up the slack for them. The government doesn't mandate you hire security for your employees to protect their home. It doesn't mandate they build you roads. They don't mandate the company you work for print and mail you a ballot.

 

The Supreme Court that made this decision is the same court that struck down DOMA. It is the same court that upheld Obamacare. Dial down your hyperbole and try some reasoning instead.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #172 of 197
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

I think life in prison is worse.

 

Indeed, for both parties involved. The criminal has to live with no freedom and society has to pay to keep him alive.

 
Your choice. Smoke em if you got em.

 

It's not your choice to make me pay higher medical bills, however.

 

We are a country of immigrants. So we need some kind of comprehensive solutions.

 

Absolutely. What does that have to do with illegal immigrants?

 
Not sure what you mean by this.

 

I'm guessing it's just a poor choice of word to describe American exceptionalism. Or a good choice of word to describe some of the deplorable behavior he exhibits.

 
 Being the world's police...that's another issue.

 

The largest military force on the planet inherently has a duty–to itself, its allies, and its enemies–to have a wider presence thereon. Isolationism, while enticing, is untenable.

 
I am anti-communist.

who isn't?

 

Off the top of my head, the commies.

 

Originally Posted by LordJohnWhorfin View Post

You don't even know or understand the meaning of the word.

 

From what I've seen, neither do the socialists.

 

Originally Posted by RichL View Post
This case has proven that socialised medical care is the way forward for America.

 

This case has proven that we should go back to bloodletting via leeches. See, I can do it, too.


Edited by Tallest Skil - 7/1/14 at 2:15am

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #173 of 197

This case has proven that socialised medical care is the way forward for America.

post #174 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Tell that to Flaneur, because he certainly pays attention to what I do.

I pay attention to the extent that you pollute and pervert so many threads with your racism, classism, enthno- and cultural centrism, depressing those better than you, sowing despair and discord, shaming humanity and common empathy. If I met you I would roll you into the gutter where you belong, by sheer force of elementary decency. You are a coward hiding behind your keyboard and your perverted employers. No one can be as stupid as you pretend to be, and still write in English.
post #175 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

Sorry but to be polite, you are as wrong as can be on the matter.

 

Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. First used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations, in the 17th century, people began to use the term to relate to observable physical traits. Such use promoted hierarchies favorable to differing ethnic groups. Starting from the 19th century, the term was often used, in a taxonomic sense, to denote genetically differentiated human populations defined by phenotype.[1][2][3]

 

It goes on much deeper within the article but the point is the word is used in an array of ways, just as I indicated.

 

As anthropologists and other evolutionary scientists have shifted away from the language of race to the term population to talk about genetic differences, historians, cultural anthropologists and other social scientists re-conceptualized the term "race" as a cultural category or social construct—a particular way that some people talk about themselves and others. Many social scientists have replaced the word race with the word "ethnicity" to refer to self-identifying groups based on beliefs concerning shared culture, ancestry and history.

 

So not to be an asshole but please give it a read to inform yourself.

 

 

Not at all. The ruling may have implications but only because the Constitution has implications. Abortion and contraception haven't become illegal because of this ruling. The company is paying for the health care plan. If they weren't then the court would have found that the company was without standing before the court.

 

You say they have no problem with Viagra or vasectomies. The objection isn't about sex or preventing pregnancy. They also have no issues with condoms, birth control pills, etc. The issue is about murder.

 

The ruling doesn't prevent the government from providing any and all services. The employees are not preventing from exercising their right to services or having someone pay for them who is not Hobby Lobby.

 

Explain for example how the government can provide subsidies for medical plans but not for contraception? How can someone apply for Blue Cross and get $400 back a month for it from the government but the government can't provide a subsidy or deliver cash for a contraceptive service provided privately?

 

That is what the court found for and it is right.

 

It is hypocritical because Apple can support a fundamental right and devote money towards it but Hobby Lobby can't in your view. Apple as a corporation does not have to remain neutral which is what many in this thread are advocating they do. Yet you demand Hobby Lobby do what you would not require of Apple.

 

I'm consistent. Apple and Tim Cook can push for marriage rights. Hobby Lobby can push for their religious rights. They are both fundamental rights per the Constitution.

I'm sorry as I said there is a distinction between Race & ethnicity. That is pretty much what you copy & pasted said. When someone starts a sentence with, not to be an asshole or anything...they usually are. 

 

Now vasectomies don't help stop pregnancy! Yeah, good to know. Is it just women that are the issue here or is it the activist judges that Bush appointed that have an ax to grind with the Affordable Care Act. By the way the "Mandate" part of the ACA which conservatives tried to say was unconstitutional came from the Heritage Foundation, a CONSERVATIVE, think tank. I'm sure you knew that also. The case is about murder? How do you know a women is even pregnant when she takes one of these pills? There seems to be an assumption there with no proof of pregnancy.

 

"The "establishment of religion" clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion to another ... in the words of Jefferson, the [First Amendment] clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between church and State' ... That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest breach."

 

"It is hypocritical because Apple can support a fundamental right and devote money towards it but Hobby Lobby can't in your view. Apple as a corporation does not have to remain neutral which is what many in this thread are advocating they do. Yet you demand Hobby Lobby do what you would not require of Apple."

 

Ah nope...Apple is not making everyone in the company support what they are doing or forcing anyone to believe in Gay rights. The constitution does not allow unbridled religious rights. Religious rights stop when they start violating the rights of others. The government in this case has clearly taken a side. Big mistake based on ideology. Alito's explanation would be thrown out in a lower court. It's muddy.


Edited by Splif - 7/1/14 at 2:51pm
post #176 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Indeed, for both parties involved. The criminal has to live with no freedom and society has to pay to keep him alive.

 

 People don't get sentenced to death & get executed the next day...it's usually quite a few years later.

 

It's not your choice to make me pay higher medical bills, however.

 

Who mention medical? Medical: So, you don't want your bills to go up but you are okay with someone else's bills going up to pay for your prescription needs? Okay. I get it.

 

Absolutely. What does that have to do with illegal immigrants?

 

What's your solution or are you just going to give me a bunch of empty rhetoric. What is the metric by which the border is secure.

 

I'm guessing it's just a poor choice of word to describe American exceptionalism. Or a good choice of word to describe some of the deplorable behavior he exhibits.

 

The largest military force on the planet inherently has a duty–to itself, its allies, and its enemies–to have a wider presence thereon. Isolationism, while enticing, is untenable.

 

What obligation do our "allies" have to this endeavor? Are they picking up any of the tab & cost in lives?

No one said anything about isolation but let's not have war as the first answer to everything.

 

Off the top of my head, the commies.

 

No shit? Of course the majority of people in this country are commies, right?

 

From what I've seen, neither do the socialists.

Apparently, neither do Americans. It's just a scary word that Conservatives throw out there. Like Unconstitutional.

 

 

This case has proven that we should go back to bloodletting via leeches. See, I can do it, too.

 

Great answer! Full of insight.

 

 

post #177 of 197
 
People don't get sentenced to death & get executed the next day...it's usually quite a few years later.

 

And that’s a travesty. 30 years on death row? Come on.

 
Who mention medical?

 

Come on.

 
Medical: So, you don't want your bills to go up but you are okay with someone else's bills going up to pay for your prescription needs? Okay. I get it.

 

Nice strawman. No.

 
What's your solution or are you just going to give me a bunch of empty rhetoric. What is the metric by which the border is secure.
 

 

That’s not what we’re discussing. Though your initial response was tenuous at best.

 
What obligation do our "allies" have to this endeavor?
 

 

Not as much as I, personally, think they ought to.

 
...lets not have war as the first answer to everything.

 

I don’t recall that being the case for several millennia.

 

No shit? Of course the majority of people in this country are commies, right?

 

*cough*

 
Apparently, neither do Americans. It's just a scary word that Conservatives throw out there. Like Unconstitutional.

 

*cough*

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #178 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

And that’s a travesty. 30 years on death row? Come on.

I don't make the rules. What worse gone in 60 seconds or a life of hell?

 

Come on.

Okay? Come on what? 

 

Nice strawman. No.

What Strawman? You said you didn't want to pay higher medical bills for something that would be prescribed.

Maybe you should look up some of the medical uses for Marijuana. 

 

That’s not what we’re discussing. Though your initial response was tenuous at best.

? I'm not sure how you deport 2 million people (find them) & the resources that it would take to do that. Maybe you have some insight?

 

Not as much as I, personally, think they ought to.

Agreed

 

I don’t recall that being the case for several millennia.

 

So US policy before GW was pre-emptive war? Why not invade North Korea - they had more of a Nuclear program than Iraq.

 

*cough*

*Pffffffffffffffffft*

 

*cough*

"Ack* Thanks for sharing your bodily functions.


Edited by Splif - 7/1/14 at 7:51pm
post #179 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

The government should do it's job and it's job is to provide contraception if that is what it decrees the population should have rather than mandating a company take up the slack for them. 

 

I just scrolled past this and thought it was very telling and interesting.

 

Government should "do its job" - but many people are opposed to any government options around healthcare, and say that it's the responsibility of the individual and/or employer. If you make healthcare coverage the responsibility of the employer, you must include all the relevant aspects of that. In other words, you can't have it both ways.

 

My view is that whoever provides the healthcare coverage is the one with the mandate to ensure appropriate access to treatments/services. Whether that's a company or the government is another issue entirely.

post #180 of 197

Could you quote properly?

 
 I don't make the rules. What worse gone in 60 seconds or a life of hell?

 

Never said you did. There you go again. What’s worse: paying to keep a serial child rapist/murderer alive or not paying that money?

 
Okay? Come on what? for something that would be prescribed.

 

Come on “we’re not talking about prescriptions at all” come on. Is this another one of those things where I’m apparently the only one who can see the end result of a conversation and so leaves it unsaid because I assume everyone else comprehends what’s going on?

 
I'm not sure how you deport 2 million people (find them) & the resources that it would take to do that.

 

You have to be joking. 10 million, by the way.

 
So US policy before GW was pre-emptive war?

 

Is English not your first language? Nothing wrong with that; I just want to know so that I can explain things further ahead of time if need be.

 
Why not invade North Korea - they had more of a Nuclear program than Iraq.

 

If the UN’s ineffectual nature in every other aspect of its functioning wasn’t clear enough, their refusal to act with regard to the Kim Jong family and their crimes against humanity should be all we need to see…

 
Thanks for sharing your bodily functions.

 

Thanks for the nonsensical ‘argument’ here.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #181 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

Could you quote properly?

 

Never said you did. There you go again. What’s worse: paying to keep a serial child rapist/murderer alive or not paying that money?

 

Come on “we’re not talking about prescriptions at all” come on. Is this another one of those things where I’m apparently the only one who can see the end result of a conversation and so leaves it unsaid because I assume everyone else comprehends what’s going on?

 

You have to be joking. 10 million, by the way.

 

Is English not your first language? Nothing wrong with that; I just want to know so that I can explain things further ahead of time if need be.

 

If the UN’s ineffectual nature in every other aspect of its functioning wasn’t clear enough, their refusal to act with regard to the Kim Jong family and their crimes against humanity should be all we need to see…

 

Thanks for the nonsensical ‘argument’ here.

 

 

I think we're done with this conversation. Agreed?

post #182 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

Sorry but to be polite, you are as wrong as can be on the matter.

 

Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by anatomical, cultural, ethnic, genetic, geographical, historical, linguistic, religious, and/or social affiliation. First used to refer to speakers of a common language and then to denote national affiliations, in the 17th century, people began to use the term to relate to observable physical traits. Such use promoted hierarchies favorable to differing ethnic groups. Starting from the 19th century, the term was often used, in a taxonomic sense, to denote genetically differentiated human populations defined by phenotype.[1][2][3]

 

It goes on much deeper within the article but the point is the word is used in an array of ways, just as I indicated.

 

As anthropologists and other evolutionary scientists have shifted away from the language of race to the term population to talk about genetic differences, historians, cultural anthropologists and other social scientists re-conceptualized the term "race" as a cultural category or social construct—a particular way that some people talk about themselves and others. Many social scientists have replaced the word race with the word "ethnicity" to refer to self-identifying groups based on beliefs concerning shared culture, ancestry and history.

 

So not to be an asshole but please give it a read to inform yourself.

 

 

Not at all. The ruling may have implications but only because the Constitution has implications. Abortion and contraception haven't become illegal because of this ruling. The company is paying for the health care plan. If they weren't then the court would have found that the company was without standing before the court.

 

You say they have no problem with Viagra or vasectomies. The objection isn't about sex or preventing pregnancy. They also have no issues with condoms, birth control pills, etc. The issue is about murder.

 

The ruling doesn't prevent the government from providing any and all services. The employees are not preventing from exercising their right to services or having someone pay for them who is not Hobby Lobby.

 

Explain for example how the government can provide subsidies for medical plans but not for contraception? How can someone apply for Blue Cross and get $400 back a month for it from the government but the government can't provide a subsidy or deliver cash for a contraceptive service provided privately?

 

That is what the court found for and it is right.

 

It is hypocritical because Apple can support a fundamental right and devote money towards it but Hobby Lobby can't in your view. Apple as a corporation does not have to remain neutral which is what many in this thread are advocating they do. Yet you demand Hobby Lobby do what you would not require of Apple.

 

I'm consistent. Apple and Tim Cook can push for marriage rights. Hobby Lobby can push for their religious rights. They are both fundamental rights per the Constitution.

I'm sorry as I said there is a distinction between Race & ethnicity. That is pretty much what you copy & pasted said. When someone starts a sentence with, not to be an asshole or anything...they usually are. 

 

 

The rest I'm not going to deal with because you have to meet a minimum threshold to be worth the time of dealing with. You've drawn the exact opposite conclusion of the worlds. The link shows race and the concept of it evolving over time and being applied in a number of contexts. You ignore it all and repeat yourself. Have a nice day!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingsoc View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

The government should do it's job and it's job is to provide contraception if that is what it decrees the population should have rather than mandating a company take up the slack for them. 

 

I just scrolled past this and thought it was very telling and interesting.

 

Government should "do its job" - but many people are opposed to any government options around healthcare, and say that it's the responsibility of the individual and/or employer. If you make healthcare coverage the responsibility of the employer, you must include all the relevant aspects of that. In other words, you can't have it both ways.

 

My view is that whoever provides the healthcare coverage is the one with the mandate to ensure appropriate access to treatments/services. Whether that's a company or the government is another issue entirely.

 

Many people are opposed but being opposed doesn't mean it is unconstitutional. (See gay marriage as a recent example.) For the people who say it is the responsibility of the individual, this ruling wouldn't affect that because compelling a company to pay for an individual wouldn't be the same. Likewise nothing about the court decision states that an individual is not allowed to pay for their own health choices including the ones that Hobby Lobby sought under a religious exemption. As for companies providing health care, that actually grew out of government interference and as usual, the government is both the problem and solution. Companies started providing health insurance as a workaround to the wage freezes put in place by government during WWII. The government froze wages. Companies couldn't attract workers by offering higher wages so they offered health insurance. Whatever insurance doesn't cover government still could cover but instead they prefer to regulate the insurance that came into being because they were busy regulating wages.....

 

Most people, when discussing health care in the United States fail to realize that the federal government already spends as much on health care as most other countries that offer universal health care in terms of pure GDP. The problem is we simply don't get any health care for that spending, however retirees and other interest groups do get their health care. As a result of government inefficiency, we now are mandated to purchase health insurance to cover the lack of health care provided by the government even though the money has already been taken.

 

This comes up in area after area. Why are people honestly so concerned about gay marriage as an example? It isn't because the government needs to sanction who you love. Rather it is because the government determines who can see you in a hospital, who can make decisions for you, who you can include in your trust or will, etc. and that is the much larger problem. It is a large and growing problem that even gay marriage in 50 states will fail to solve. It is the root problem.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #183 of 197
Originally Posted by Splif View Post
I think we're done with this conversation. Agreed?

 

It was going pretty well until you decided to throw a whole bunch of insults into your post and not reply to anything I said. So no, “I’m leaving, therefore I’m right” is not an acceptable answer from you.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #184 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

It was going pretty well until you decided to throw a whole bunch of insults into your post and not reply to anything I said. So no, “I’m leaving, therefore I’m right” is not an acceptable answer from you.

I apologize for the remarks. I took some of the things you said as cheap shots. Like:

 

Could you quote properly?

 

Who cares? Really?

 

"Is English not your first language? Nothing wrong with that; I just want to know so that I can explain things further ahead of time if need be.

 

Come on “we’re not talking about prescriptions at all” come on.

 

Were you talking about civil & law enforcement issues? You were not clear.

 

Is this another one of those things where I’m apparently the only one who can see the end result of a conversation and so leaves it unsaid because I assume everyone else comprehends what’s going on?

 

Who is everyone else? Some of your answers are like you are having a conversation with yourself & we are all supposed to understand what you are talking about. It seems like you are being condescending in some of your answers i.e. *cough* what does that mean? How do I reply to *cough*

 

Thanks for the nonsensical ‘argument’ here.

 

Maybe this is all just your sense of humor & I took it the wrong way or misunderstood. I don't know you. If so I apologize. I never declared myself the winner of anything. I was just done with your perceived (on my part) nonsense.

post #185 of 197
Originally Posted by Splif View Post

Who cares? Really?

 

I do, as does everyone else. Helps immensely with visibility and subsequent quoting, unless you’re purposely going for “success by annoyance”.

 
Were you talking about civil & law enforcement issues? You were not clear. 

 

Guy smokes a cigarette. Guy requires medical attention because of said cigarette. Medical attention requires time, money, and resources. Said time, money, and resources are removed from others who need the same attention who don’t commit suicide on a daily basis.

 

Shouldn’t be that hard to grasp.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #186 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

The rest I'm not going to deal with because you have to meet a minimum threshold to be worth the time of dealing with. You've drawn the exact opposite conclusion of the worlds. The link shows race and the concept of it evolving over time and being applied in a number of contexts. You ignore it all and repeat yourself. Have a nice day!

I didn't ignore anything. Here is another take:

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethnicity_vs_Race

This isn't relevant to what we are discussing.

 

Many people are opposed but being opposed doesn't mean it is unconstitutional. (See gay marriage as a recent example.) For the people who say it is the responsibility of the individual, this ruling wouldn't affect that because compelling a company to pay for an individual wouldn't be the same. Likewise nothing about the court decision states that an individual is not allowed to pay for their own health choices including the ones that Hobby Lobby sought under a religious exemption. As for companies providing health care, that actually grew out of government interference and as usual, the government is both the problem and solution. Companies started providing health insurance as a workaround to the wage freezes put in place by government during WWII. The government froze wages. Companies couldn't attract workers by offering higher wages so they offered health insurance. Whatever insurance doesn't cover government still could cover but instead they prefer to regulate the insurance that came into being because they were busy regulating wages.....

 

Most people, when discussing health care in the United States fail to realize that the federal government already spends as much on health care as most other countries that offer universal health care in terms of pure GDP. The problem is we simply don't get any health care for that spending, however retirees and other interest groups do get their health care. As a result of government inefficiency, we now are mandated to purchase health insurance to cover the lack of health care provided by the government even though the money has already been taken.

 

This comes up in area after area. Why are people honestly so concerned about gay marriage as an example? It isn't because the government needs to sanction who you love. Rather it is because the government determines who can see you in a hospital, who can make decisions for you, who you can include in your trust or will, etc. and that is the much larger problem. It is a large and growing problem that even gay marriage in 50 states will fail to solve. It is the root problem.

 

There is a big assumption being made that a woman is pregnant or an egg has been fertilized before taking these pills? How exactly is that determined? Also, she can't be pregnant because the scientific definition of pregnant is not the fertilization of the egg or conception. You can fertilize eggs in a Petri dish. Is it abortion when those die or are killed? Pregnancy is the development of one or more offspring, known as an embryo or fetus, in a woman's uterus. It is the common name for gestation in humans. Justice Scalia stated the scientific definition did not matter because according to their (Hobby Lobby's) religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. Again I ask the same questions as above.

 

The argument was mostly based on The Religious Freedom Restoration Act & was misinterpreted.

 

Some of the dessent (you can find the full dessent if you are interested): http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/30/justice-ruth-bader-ginsberg-trolls-scalia-in-blistering-dissent-of-hobby-lobby-ruling/

 

Where in the Constitution does it say that Gay people can't be married?


Edited by Splif - 7/2/14 at 6:42pm
post #187 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
I do, as does everyone else. Helps immensely with visibility and subsequent quoting, unless you’re purposely going for “success by annoyance”.

 

Okay. Understood. I did italicize my responses. Sorry, that you are easily annoyed.

 

Guy smokes a cigarette. Guy requires medical attention because of said cigarette. Medical attention requires time, money, and resources. Said time, money, and resources are removed from others who need the same attention who don’t commit suicide on a daily basis.

Shouldn’t be that hard to grasp.

 

Wouldn't have been if that is what you said. You just said Come on. "Is this another one of those things where I’m apparently the only one who can see the end result of a conversation and so leaves it unsaid because I assume everyone else comprehends what’s going on?" Yeah, this is perfectly clear. /s

 

I guess prescription drugs do not cause health issues. Do you lead a healthy lifestyle? If not aren't everyone's premiums going up because of that?

Humans get sick & die there is no avoiding that. There are other ways that marijuana is put into someone's system other than smoking.

 

Is this easier for you to read? I wouldn't want you bursting a vein in your head or anything, that would make my health premium go up.;)

post #188 of 197
Originally Posted by Splif View Post
Okay. Understood. I did italicize my responses. Sorry, that you are easily annoyed.

 

Knock it off.

 

I guess prescription drugs do not cause health issues. Do you lead a healthy lifestyle? If not arent everyone's premiums going up because of that? Humans get sick & die there is no avoiding that. There are other ways that marijuana is put into someone's system other than smoking.

 

So you don’t even remotely have an argument here. Why not just say that instead of spewing fallacy?

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #189 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Knock it off.

Okay, after you.

 

So you don’t even remotely have an argument here. Why not just say that instead of spewing fallacy?

What fallacy have I spewed? Prescription drugs can cause health issues. Being over weight can cause diabetes, heart disease, etc. People do get sick & die. Marijuana can be ingested, synthesized into an injectable by extracting the oil from the plant. 

 

http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/features/medical-marijuana-uses

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/07/health/charlotte-child-medical-marijuana/

post #190 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

This comes up in area after area. Why are people honestly so concerned about gay marriage as an example? It isn't because the government needs to sanction who you love. Rather it is because the government determines who can see you in a hospital, who can make decisions for you, who you can include in your trust or will, etc. and that is the much larger problem. 

 

You just answered why people are concerned about gay marriage. Until gay people can legally marry, numerous legal rights (I believe it's almost in the realm of 200 individual protections/rights) will not be available.

 

I agree - government doesn't need to sanction who you love. But I don't think anyone is making that argument, as such.

post #191 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splif View Post
 

Of course...nothing has been achieved?!? Is it okay to be proud of your nationality? Seems like a narrow definition of the word pride.

I think you can admire the achievements of others, and you can love your country, but pride should be reserved for things you have done yourself. That's not to be narrow, it's because the feeling you get when you achieve a goal of your own is different enough from those other feelings to deserve it's own name.

post #192 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post
 

I think you can admire the achievements of others, and you can love your country, but pride should be reserved for things you have done yourself. That's not to be narrow, it's because the feeling you get when you achieve a goal of your own is different enough from those other feelings to deserve it's own name.

That is one valid definition but it is not the only definition of the word pride. So it is a narrow definition.

post #193 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by rf9 View Post


You're funny. Har Har. The iTunes cards aren't for gay people, they are for all people. You don't have to be gay anything to attend the pride celebration. 1oyvey.gif

.......... or apparently a sense of humor.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #194 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

Stop trolling. The company doesn't have the religious views. The owners have them and are being mandated to take private actions with their private company. The government should do it's job and it's job is to provide contraception if that is what it decrees the population should have rather than mandating a company take up the slack for them. The government doesn't mandate you hire security for your employees to protect their home. It doesn't mandate they build you roads. They don't mandate the company you work for print and mail you a ballot.

 

The Supreme Court that made this decision is the same court that struck down DOMA. It is the same court that upheld Obamacare. Dial down your hyperbole and try some reasoning instead.

If anybody's trolling, you are. There is a law, it should apply to everybody the same. A company should not be able to apply for exemptions on the basis of its owner's religious beliefs. If the owner has such strong beliefs that they clash with the laws, then they should get out of the business, period. I find it completely outrageous that this 13,000 employee company is being depicted as a little mom-and-pop shop where the poor religious owners are being bullied by big government. Moreover, these big hypocrites were paying for birth control before, so this move has absolutely nothing to do with so-called "deeply held religious beliefs" and everything to do with helping the right wing chip away at the ACA.

But then again you seem to lack the basic common sense to understand even something that simple. I pity you.

post #195 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

You are clearly the uneducated person here. An immature person who is too dumb to obey forum rules, as you are violating them by engaging in a childish personal attack. You sound exactly like a typical, low information liberal, one who is ignorant, one who is obviously not very well educated or well mannered, and you come across as a little chihuahua, all bark and no bite.  I will not waste any more of my time responding to a poster which I have just designated to be a worthless specimen, and I hereby officially command that you are to be aborted from my sight, so off you go to the ignore list.

Do you even read what you write? Pathetic.

post #196 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJohnWhorfin View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post
 

 

Stop trolling. The company doesn't have the religious views. The owners have them and are being mandated to take private actions with their private company. The government should do it's job and it's job is to provide contraception if that is what it decrees the population should have rather than mandating a company take up the slack for them. The government doesn't mandate you hire security for your employees to protect their home. It doesn't mandate they build you roads. They don't mandate the company you work for print and mail you a ballot.

 

The Supreme Court that made this decision is the same court that struck down DOMA. It is the same court that upheld Obamacare. Dial down your hyperbole and try some reasoning instead.

If anybody's trolling, you are. There is a law, it should apply to everybody the same. A company should not be able to apply for exemptions on the basis of its owner's religious beliefs. If the owner has such strong beliefs that they clash with the laws, then they should get out of the business, period. I find it completely outrageous that this 13,000 employee company is being depicted as a little mom-and-pop shop where the poor religious owners are being bullied by big government. Moreover, these big hypocrites were paying for birth control before, so this move has absolutely nothing to do with so-called "deeply held religious beliefs" and everything to do with helping the right wing chip away at the ACA.

But then again you seem to lack the basic common sense to understand even something that simple. I pity you.

 

The reality is that laws cannot overcome basic rights. The ruling for this decision is the same as that which supports gay marriage, that to have your rights denied, the government must have a rational basis for their actions that meets a strict scrutiny review. Religion is a fundamental right. It is the same as speech, and voting. It doesn't get abridged just because you say so.

 

This isn't about birth control. Even after this decision Hobby Lobby pays for 16 different types of contraception. The case was about abortifacients or drugs that act on a fertilized egg. Many religious groups consider this to be a form of abortion and actually the term is scientific and applied by industry for this class of drugs as well.

 

As for the law applying the same for everyone, the law already has exemptions for religious purposes. Hobby Lobby and other companies were simply denied access to the same exemption. For example the Catholic Church was given an exemption for religious reasons but Catholic Charities that are run by the same church, no, so they filed suit.

 

Speaking of basic common sense, common sense would dictate that the easiest way for the government to handle this, the least restrictive route is for government to provide the service. Government can provide a subsidy for an entire medical insurance plan. They can provide cards for food assistance. They can certainly do the same with abortifacients. Mandating your employer pay for your abortions is like mandating your employer print out and mail your ballot or pay for your wedding. If you can't understand that then the pity is reserved for you.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #197 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJohnWhorfin View Post
 

Do you even read what you write? Pathetic.

If you have a problem with someones post, debate them cordially , don't ever resort to name calling or bullying. It not only negates you position but gives the person you are flaming a stronger foot hold into your psyche.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple, Inc. employees pass out free iTunes song cards at San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade