or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple contributes $100,000 to fight California's No on 8 battle
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple contributes $100,000 to fight California's No on 8 battle - Page 9

post #321 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

Gay marriage has been legal in Canada since 2005. It is indeed a matter of equality and civil rights.

I approve and praise Apple and Google for fighting this outrageous campaign by fanatic religious groups to deny the civil rights of others, the rights of people who do not belong to and do not recognize themselves as members of these churches and groups, including the Catholic Church.

This attempt to deny the rights of others is no different than denying the rights of someone by reason of their race, colour, or sex. Ask a woman, a Jew or a Black person if their rights should be denied or equal to every other American.

In Canada, with a population of over 33 million, I was surprised to learn that the number of gay marriages is between 6,500 and 8,000 per year. Gay and lesbian couples don't marry for the same reasons as straight heterosexual couples: Marriage is all about being financially responsible for your spouse and the children of your spouse, even if you are not the biologic parent of the children.

A divorce is a financial catastrophy for everyone, gay or straight, as spouses must sell their home and share their pensions, retirement allocations and life savings.

In Canada, fewer and fewer people are willing to commit to one another to that extent, especially in the absence of children. I don't believe that more than 30% of the couples choose marriage, even if they have children.

Marriage is all about financial responsability and equal rights. Marriage is not about sex or religion, just the financial burden of breakup.

Everyone can have sex without the commitment of marriage. If you choose to marry, you become financially responsible for your spouse and the children of your spouse.

Thank you Apple and Google for doing the right thing.


Quite. I always swore I would never get married. Then a friend told me that if she ever had a child she would marry the father, love or no love. She explained why and I saw her point. Much as she disagreed with the idea it was her child insurance in the eyes of the law. Times have changed, thankfully, and in many countries marriage is on the way out. Fewer and fewer people are getting married in the Scandinavian countries.
post #322 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeisthegoal View Post

Yes, transformation is what Jesus was about, and he went out of his way to serve, eat with, walk with people considered outsiders in his day. The Bible is stories of people trying to perceive God, includes many contradictions. The bottom line I find is respect and justice and love for every person. Every person is beloved. Prop. 8 seeks to deny some people legal rights. Prop. 8 is funded by religious people seeking to tell the state how to define rights. Religions can define marriage in their traditions, and they do, and many traditions contradict one another. Some say men rule over women. Some say you can't marry outside the religion. Some religions believe in polygamy. State law is different. State law is about equalty for everyone, it is about equal access to privileges of marriage. One more comment, please have the respect for LGBT persons to ask them what they think and experience on this issue. I read this site often. I applaud Apple for contributing to defeat Prop. 8, just as I would applaud any company for contributing to stop discrimination against people of color and women.

Jesus did go out of his way to be with the most broken of God's people -- even prostitutes. But he didn't condone their behavior and didn't change the rules to allow people's pet sins to be considered "O.K."

Marriage is a right, but it's right for one man and one woman, that's all.
post #323 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by KiltBear View Post

JOKE: a little self deprecating humor to highlight the ridiculousness of the term: The Gay Agenda

The Homosexual Agenda

6:00 am Gym

8:00 am Breakfast (oatmeal and egg whites)

9:00 am Hair appointment

10:00 am Shopping

12:00 PM Brunch

2:00 PM

1) Assume complete control of the US Federal, State and Local Governments as well as all other national governments

2) Recruit all straight youngsters to our debauched lifestyle

3) Destroy all healthy heterosexual marriages

4) Replace all school counselors in grades K-12 with agents of Colombian and Jamaican drug cartels

5) Establish planetary chain of "homo breeding gulags" where over medicated imprisoned straight women are turned into artificially impregnated baby factories to produce prepubescent love slaves for our devotedly pederastic gay leadership

6) Bulldoze all houses of worship

7) Secure total control of the INTERNET and all mass media for the exclusive use of child pornographers

2:30 PM Get Forty Winks of Beauty Rest to prevent facial wrinkles from stress of world conquest

4:00 PM Cocktails

6:00 PM Light Dinner (soup, salad, with Chardonnay)

8:00 PM Theater

11:00 PM Bed (du jour)

you forgot 7 to 7:30 Cruising for tricks in the Apple Store. Seriously congrats APPLE for sticking its nose where it had NO BUSINESS. I guess think different now has a new meaning.
I think APPLE needs to go back to making great computers and software... oh that's right its No
longer APPLE COMPUTER. Sure Apple would have a lot of gay customers but also a lot of straight
folks as well, way to build a cohesive brand..BTW i'm not bigoted I hate everyone equally. Why take a position that effectively causes sides. Personally the only thing I want to fit into slot F is a firewire cable... oh wait that's no longer supported.
post #324 of 1350
srs, a press release from the Yes/8 people isn't a credible source.
post #325 of 1350
I don't believe in discriminating against people over something they were born with, so if gayness is genetic they should be allowed to marry. I do believe in discriminating against people over their chosen actions, so if gayness is a choice then yes it's ok to ban gay marriage.

I used to believe it was a choice (it seemed obvious that it was a choice who you sleep with) but now I believe it is likely genetic so I support this action by Apple.

I know religious people believe marriage is their institution, and they should get to choose who can participate, but though it probably started with them it has grown much wider than that. i.e. purely secular men and women have been getting married for ages. And it's still the case that the religious people own the churches, so they can easily prevent one of these ceremonies happening there if they think it would offend God.
post #326 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by WESALLEN View Post

ou homos are not as powerful or as popular as you think. YOU WILL LOSE THE PROP 8 FIGHT BY A LANDSLIDE. I cant wait!!!!

This is distressing and ridiculous. Please know that there are those of us who are in Favor of Proposition 8 that have carefully discussed and considered both sides. We are not all crazy or uneducated.
post #327 of 1350
The schools issue is so off base. First, local school districts decide such a curriculum matter. Second, topcis like sex education are only brought up in age-appropriate ways. Third, the point of books about same sex parents is to bring the reality of various children's and adolescent's lives into any discussion about families. Not to train young people to so-called choose a sexual orientation. But to help all young people know that gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered persons are part of our communities and schools, and deserve respect. Also, to let any young people who identify themselves as not hetersexual to find support and appreciation for who they are. The messages of many yes on 8 folks only confirms the need for public education to say, in age-appropriate ways, that being gay is okay. Do you know how many gay and lesbian young people contemplate suicide because they feel totally alone in our society, with religions telling them they are immoral, wrong, unworthy?
post #328 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by nowayout11 View Post

srs, a press release from the Yes/8 people isn't a credible source.

The press release references the same groups lobbying for in the east what they are promising will not occur in the west.
post #329 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeisthegoal View Post

Do you know how many gay and lesbian young people contemplate suicide because they feel totally alone in our society, with religions telling them they are immoral, wrong, unworthy?

You bring up a very serious and meaningful point. But can we not deal with tolerance and acceptance without redefining marriage?
post #330 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Jesus did go out of his way to be with the most broken of God's people -- even prostitutes. But he didn't condone their behavior and didn't change the rules to allow people's pet sins to be considered "O.K."

Marriage is a right, but it's right for one man and one woman, that's all.

I simply ask you to listen to same-sex couples tell what it is like to live in our society. And listen to many institutions who believe freedom and rights in marriage should include same-sex couples. Much of Jesus' ministry was about breaking rules of religious leaders for the higher commandment of loving all neighbors. Jesus did not address homosexuality. And he didn't judge the behavior of prostitutes, either, he much more judged conformity and oppression of others.
post #331 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by alpha10711 View Post

After a lot of research and an agonizingly long wait for the aluminum MacBooks, I was planning to go to the Apple Store tomorrow to purchase a new 2.4Ghz MacBook. Then I saw this news.

If Jobs had given $100,000 of his own money to oppose California Proposition 8, it would have been different. If Apple employees want to give their own money, that is their business. But the definition of marriage is a deeply-held, moral and ethical position. And for a company such as Apple, which is known for the fanatical loyalty of its customer base, to take one side of such a critical issue is to suggest that those who support Apple should support that view also.

CEO's should use their own resources in support of a cause, instead of taking the revenue that comes from a company's customer base and using it in controversial ways that many of their customers cannot support.

So, as much as I was looking forward to it, my purchase of a MacBook is off--and no iPod Touch either.

oh man. let me just put it so i dont get banned here. you're one limited mind.


and onto topic ... i dont care who gets married to who ( or what ). but its high time for "couples" to have same rights as " married couple ".
post #332 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Because if you know God, then it's tough to enjoy things that he doesn't approve of. Sex before marriage is in the same category as homosexual sex. God made sex to be for one male/female couple, never to be unfaithful and never to divorce. Anything other than that, and you're short-changing yourself. And her.

If you don't know God, then I can understand why you feel you can do whatever pleases you.

Why do you assume I do whatever pleases me? I do try and find pleasure in whatever I do but that is beside the point.

I don't actually believe anybody knows god, but the 'feeling' of this absolute knowledge must be a little like being stoned - not that I have ever inhaled. The problem with your idea of sex and marriage is that by following your doctrine you stand a very good chance of marrying someone you are not compatible with sexually. You wouldn't know but that is one helluva hurdle to get over in real life. You may stay and be loyal but it is hard to be happy when you realize you made a mistake. A situation which often has consequences way beyond you and your wife's relationship. I am not saying you will but you have very little chance of guarding against it. Your god is extremely cruel.
post #333 of 1350
I totally agree with your viewpoint.

Besides, children should be not be educated by Gay or Non-Gay Viewpoint.
post #334 of 1350
We are all free to define and cultivate marriage as we choose. Religions are likewise free. And we do define marriage differently. I do not seriously protest your right to define marriage as between a man and a woman. I believe differently, and my church believes differently. We celebrated same-sex marriages long before the Supreme Court decision. You (and your church if you are part of one) and me and my church can disagree. Prop. 8 is about legal, state rights, about what the state recognizes in issues of property ownership, child custody, applying for loans, and much more.
post #335 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPeon View Post

By design, the body was intend to pro-create. That is it's intend purpose. Anything else is a perversion. If you want to destroy something, what do you do? You pervert it.

So reading these forums is a perversion for you? Wearing clothes is a perversion for you? We are sexually dimorphic but nature, but that does not mean anything outside the attempt to procreate to impregnate/get pregnant is a perversion. By your definition condoms are the devil's work and sterile people should not be allowed to have sex.

What is perverse is to not act as our biology dictates us to act. That doesn't mean that their must be a goal outside the act itself. Typical mammalian biology has made the act enjoy enough that procreation is inevitable, and with over 6.5 Billion people on this planet nature seems to be doing it's job swimmingly. (vague pun intended)


Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Holy crap - I would hate to go to a party with you.

By his definition, he would not go to a party unless his goal was to impregnate someone or get impregnated (depending on his/her gender).


Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000 View Post

yeah, we already talked about that. My history book must have just sucked or I had a really weird history prof... But yeah, it's just BC/AD in a PC form.

At least it wasn't Before Christ's Era and Christ's Era.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jbh0001 View Post

But the majority of the world has adopted the use of a Christian adapted calendar: the Gregorian Calendar. Granted, that it has done so to simplify business transactions rather than to endorse Christianity, which makes its adoption an use mostly a non issue.

That is why I changed my view of it. I think changing the terminology to be more Universal is not a bad idea, but changing the calendaring system would be impossible to change and highly disruptive if attempted. At least way, the BCE/CE can slowly creep into society without affecting the numbering. There are plenty of other calendaring systems in use that we don't acknowledge as a whole. For example, Fri, 24 October 2008 = 25th of Tishrei, 5769 in the Hebrew calender.

PS: In 1873, the French had a novel idea to go to a French Revolutionary Time. This was a decimal-based clock.This was a 10 hour day (which means that the hours were 2.5x longer than current hours), then spit into 100 minutes per hour and 100 seconds per minute. This does have some logic to it, but we are so set on the Babylonian obsession of 12s, with out 24 hour clock with 60 minutes and 60 seconds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal_time#France PPS: I was told as a kid that I needed to know the decimal system because the US will adopt it like the rest of the world shortly. The only thing we measure that way is 2L of soda. Are teachers still telling students that?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #336 of 1350
What is Bill Gates' position on Proposition 8? Somebody isn't going to have anything to puter on.
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #337 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabu22 View Post

This is simply wrong.
Marriage is between a man and a woman. What's next......allowing people to get married to a member of their own familiy............or peradventure their dog (after all don't we love our animals),cat,etc.......My rights are being taken away when I can't marry a object. When,where does it stop? I love my toothpaste - can I marry that? Why not?
Apple should not be getting involved into politics. It will only divide and exclude people.

Exclude people? How ironic. That is exactly what the proposed Constitutional amendment would do.

It is disappointing that there are some shallow-thinking Macintosh users in our midst. I imagine that many of them would have been against giving women the right to vote, against outlawing slavery, and against allowing black people to drink from "white" water fountains.
post #338 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabu22 View Post

This is simply wrong.
Marriage is between a man and a woman. What's next......allowing people to get married to a member of their own familiy............or peradventure their dog (after all don't we love our animals),cat,etc.......My rights are being taken away when I can't marry a object. When,where does it stop? I love my toothpaste - can I marry that? Why not?
Apple should not be getting involved into politics. It will only divide and exclude people.



\t
I totally agree with your viewpoint.

Besides, children should not be affacted by Gay or Non-Gay Viewpoint.
post #339 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by srs View Post

You bring up a very serious and meaningful point. But can we not deal with tolerance and acceptance without redefining marriage?

Sorry, no. Marriage is such a socially and culturally entrenched institution that if it isn't open to all it signals cultural and institutional discrimination base upon sexual orientation.
post #340 of 1350
As a gay man, I have never felt more unwelcome on this board than after reading 9 pages just dripping with hate and bile from so many good "Christians."

I'm just as moral, just as ethical as this "frugal" person who chooses to judge me and hate me from afar. I pay my taxes, I go to church, I serve my community, I vote in every election. I am no different from any other informed or active citizen. I am also gay.

I didn't choose to be gay, and I've known I was gay since I hit puberty at 12 years old. If I could magically not be gay, I wouldn't choose that, either, as that would be altering a core, unchosen part of what makes me who I am.

Frugal, Reich and the other hatemongers here don't know me. They don't know anything about people like me. They've taken me and everyone like me, lumped us together as a big, evil "other," and pretend all gays have some sort of common "Agenda."

I'm glad Apple values me, not only as a customer, but as a human being. I just ordered a MacBook Pro. That's 2% of their donation now paid for.

Frugal, Reich, et al -- irony is the universe's favorite device for turning the hateful back upon themselves. Remember the hateful things you've said here the day one of your children, one of your friends, or someone you care about tells you they're gay. It's one thing to say them about me and anonymous people like me; it's another to say it to someone close to you's face.
post #341 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

By his definition, he would not go to a party unless his goal was to impregnate someone or get impregnated (depending on his/her gender).

You crack me up! Now I REALLY REALLY don't want to go to a party with him. If he's a girl I'll have to reserve judgement till we meet.
post #342 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeisthegoal View Post

We are all free to define and cultivate marriage as we choose. Religions are likewise free. And we do define marriage differently. I do not seriously protest your right to define marriage as between a man and a woman. I believe differently, and my church believes differently. We celebrated same-sex marriages long before the Supreme Court decision. You (and your church if you are part of one) and me and my church can disagree. Prop. 8 is about legal, state rights, about what the state recognizes in issues of property ownership, child custody, applying for loans, and much more.

In states where there are no so-called "civil unions" and where same-sex couples do not receive every legal protection, I agree and demand that they should receive those rights. However, in California, Proposition 8 does not take away any rights from gay and lesbian domestic partners. Gays and lesbians in California can already enjoy all the legal rights and benefits of marriage. The California Family Code says, “domestic partners shall have all the rights, protections and benefits” of married spouses. There are NO exceptions to this. Proposition 8 will not change that.

My understanding and perspective is that this redefining marriage ultimately effect the community in the previously listed issues such as education, adoption, private institutions receiving government funding, etc.

I agree with both Joe Biden and Sarah Palin who spoke for themselves and their respective running mates that they support the traditional definition of marriage (in the recent VP debate).

(I hate saying that I agree with Sarah Palin... it makes me cringe)
post #343 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireball1244 View Post

As a gay man, I have never felt more unwelcome on this board than after reading 9 pages just dripping with hate and bile from so many good "Christians."

I'm just as moral, just as ethical as this "frugal" person who chooses to judge me and hate me from afar. I pay my taxes, I go to church, I serve my community, I vote in every election. I am no different from any other informed or active citizen. I am also gay.

I didn't choose to be gay, and I've known I was gay since I hit puberty at 12 years old. If I could magically not be gay, I wouldn't choose that, either, as that would be altering a core, unchosen part of what makes me who I am.

Frugal, Reich and the other hatemongers here don't know me. They don't know anything about people like me. They've taken me and everyone like me, lumped us together as a big, evil "other," and pretend all gays have some sort of common "Agenda."

I'm glad Apple values me, not only as a customer, but as a human being. I just ordered a MacBook Pro. That's 2% of their donation now paid for.

Frugal, Reich, et al -- irony is the universe's favorite device for turning the hateful back upon themselves. Remember the hateful things you've said here the day one of your children, one of your friends, or someone you care about tells you they're gay. It's one thing to say them about me and anonymous people like me; it's another to say it to someone close to you's face.

These people have absolutely no idea but I agree, it is disheartening. I have a friend with a five year old boy who is so obviously gay (he knows something but I doubt he realizes what it is). How anybody can say you have a choice as to what you are is beyond me. Undoubtedly when these people start having sex they will realize there are some things that turn them on more than others, who the hell knows why. You may make a decision to experiment in order to discover, but your discovery will be exactly that, a discovery, not a choice.
post #344 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by frugality View Post

Jesus did go out of his way to be with the most broken of God's people -- even prostitutes. But he didn't condone their behavior and didn't change the rules to allow people's pet sins to be considered "O.K."

Marriage is a right, but it's right for one man and one woman, that's all.

Funny, I don't remember Jesus saying that either.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #345 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fireball1244 View Post

As a gay man, I have never felt more unwelcome on this board than after reading 9 pages just dripping with hate and bile from so many good "Christians."

Thank you for your post. I admit it is difficult to stand up for Prop 8 when I look at much of the company I stand with. Shame on them.

I find it possible to both support Prop 8 and also same-sex civil unions and the entailed legal rights and protections. I am only in favor of maintaining the traditional definition of "marriage."
post #346 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by srs View Post

I agree with both Joe Biden and Sarah Palin who spoke for themselves and their respective running mates that they support the traditional definition of marriage (in the recent VP debate).

(I hate saying that I agree with Sarah Palin... it makes me cringe)

Both Biden and Palin have a religious bias that dictates their viewpoints. Biden is a strict Catholic and Palin a Charismatic Fundamentalist Christian. Both are entitled to their views, but those views should never be made policy of the government.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #347 of 1350
So when I buy Apple products I am supporting a business that is actively campaigning to change the traditional definition of marriage?

I have personally bought 5 Apple computers and 6 iPods (not to mention dozens of accessories) in the past 5 years. I am also the pastor of a large church, which has, under my leadership bought dozens more Apple computers. In addition, many people in our church have "gone Mac" due to our experience.

The choice to NOT be neutral regarding cultural issues about which many Apple customers have deeply-held and thoughtful opinions may force many to NOT support Apple with our purchases. As a committed Apple user, I sincerely hope Apple changes the decision and withdraws the donation. Please do not force people to go back to PCs because of our consciences.

Whether or not to offer equal rights and benefits to employees same-sex partners is a call for any company to make. But to use a company's money to engage in politics (it IS political!) and seek to influence people with company money is crossing a line. This is not a civil rights issue, for some it is a morality and/or cultural issue. With all my heart, I ask Apple to remain neutral in this.

Are the shareholders aware of the financial harm that could result? Just look at this thread. It's not a wise decision for Apple to engage in something so divisive. Not good.
post #348 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacSonomaFive View Post

So when I buy Apple products I am supporting a business that is actively campaigning to change the traditional definition of marriage?

I have personally bought 5 Apple computers and 6 iPods (not to mention dozens of accessories) in the past 5 years. I am also the pastor of a large church, which has, under my leadership bought dozens more Apple computers. In addition, many people in our church have "gone Mac" due to our experience.

The choice to NOT be neutral regarding cultural issues about which many Apple customers have deeply-held and thoughtful opinions may force many to NOT support Apple with our purchases. As a committed Apple user, I sincerely hope Apple changes the decision and withdraws the donation. Please do not force people to go back to PCs because of our consciences.

Whether or not to offer equal rights and benefits to employees same-sex partners is a call for any company to make. But to use a company's money to engage in politics (it IS political!) and seek to influence people with company money is crossing a line. This is not a civil rights issue, for some it is a morality and/or cultural issue. With all my heart, I ask Apple to remain neutral in this.

Are the shareholders aware of the financial harm that could result? Just look at this thread. It's not a wise decision for Apple to engage in something so divisive. Not good.

But AppleInsider has a lot of new members.
Cubist
Reply
Cubist
Reply
post #349 of 1350
Aaargh, I wonder why Apple would do such a thing? If Apple stay quiet no one would care (religious or non-religious), now since they made a public declaration, anti-gay people will start criticizing apple and such for supporting gay marriage. Not to mention about other effects that might happen.

I don't care bout gay marriage but I say its wrong. Just my personal op.
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
post #350 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacSonomaFive View Post

So when I buy Apple products I am supporting a business that is actively campaigning to change the traditional definition of marriage?

I have personally bought 5 Apple computers and 6 iPods (not to mention dozens of accessories) in the past 5 years. I am also the pastor of a large church, which has, under my leadership bought dozens more Apple computers. In addition, many people in our church have "gone Mac" due to our experience.

The choice to NOT be neutral regarding cultural issues about which many Apple customers have deeply-held and thoughtful opinions may force many to NOT support Apple with our purchases. As a committed Apple user, I sincerely hope Apple changes the decision and withdraws the donation. Please do not force people to go back to PCs because of our consciences.

Whether or not to offer equal rights and benefits to employees’ same-sex partners is a call for any company to make. But to use a company's money to engage in politics (it IS political!) and seek to influence people with company money is crossing a line. This is not a civil rights issue, for some it is a morality and/or cultural issue. With all my heart, I ask Apple to remain neutral in this.

Are the shareholders aware of the financial harm that could result? Just look at this thread. It's not a wise decision for Apple to engage in something so divisive. Not good.

I'm in charge of a high school's IT management & purchase. I've been trying to switch our main platform to Mac for years, now I have more reason to do so for I not only like Apple as a innovative tech company, but a respectful social issue participant.

Even if I can't migrate our database & server to Xservers running OS X over night, I will make sure every new notebook issued this year, the new MacBook Pro will be an option, and I bet a lot of my fellow teachers will take it in a heart beat.
post #351 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllenKids View Post

Prop 8 offend me in a worst way, I'm hetero and not a USA citizen.

If this prop ever get passed, the american spirit will be a little more dead.

This country would probably be better off without you! Please leave, do something to get INS to kick you out. I hope your visa or whatever is allowing you to stay here is revoked! This country needs less like you!
post #352 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by POd View Post

This country would probably be better off without you! Please leave, do something to get INS to kick you out. I hope your visa or whatever is allowing you to stay here is revoked! This country needs less like you!

Stop stereotyping yourself already.

Good thing you don't have a say about my VISA as long as you're not some NSA agent who can mark me as a "Terrorist" for supporting gay rights, or maybe "Arab"?
post #353 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacSonomaFive View Post

So when I buy Apple products I am supporting a business that is actively campaigning to change the traditional definition of marriage?

The definition of marriage was altered as soon as it became a legal contract. All this is doing is giving same sex couples the right to have that same legal contract. This does affect any religious definitions of marriage, for which there are many. It also doesn't force, request, or regulate how religions must deal with same sex marriages. This is only about the legal aspect of the union between two people who are devoting their lives to each other.

Did this legal contract originally stem from the religious marriage? Sure! But the term has changed and have been altered. It's The word marriage is now a polyseme, meaning that it has related but distinct meanings. The religious one for whatever religion you choose to follow and the legal one.

A Catholic can get married and divorced many times by law, but the church will only recognize the first. They are not required to perform the other ceremonies just as they will not required to perform any gay ceremonies.

I think the naming is really what is throwing people off on this civil liberty. Do you have any ideas on what to call it? A Fudge Pact? (I'm just kidding!) Seriously, if we are going to change the name, the name for the legal union and the union under God have to be different.

Quote:
Whether or not to offer equal rights and benefits to employees same-sex partners is a call for any company to make. But to use a company's money to engage in politics (it IS political!) and seek to influence people with company money is crossing a line. This is not a civil rights issue, for some it is a morality and/or cultural issue. With all my heart, I ask Apple to remain neutral in this.

All civil rights issues are political, but there is no mistaken that this is political. It wasn't long ago that it was considered immoral for interracial couples to marry. Are you disgusted by that? If not, I bet you know or knew people that are/were by the very idea, but I find it hard to think of anyone that would publicly say that it's an affront to God in this day and age. It's not any different. There is plenty of evidence to support the feelings you are expressing here. I don't mean to come off as hostile. From your postings you seem very decent, but I do think your definition and feelings are an emotional response to a learned attitude, one that I hope does change over time.

As for the money, Apple, Google et al. donate money to many organizations. These are a tax right off and are part of any healthy business. The only reason we know about this one is the current controversy surrounding it.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #354 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by city View Post

But AppleInsider has a lot of new members.

There are a lot of new members that signed up just to comment on this thread. AI need more controversial articles.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #355 of 1350
Lots of replies already and lots of emotion. Obviously this topic strikes a nerve. I would think a company of Apple's size would do best to shy away from this controversy. Not good for business at all.

That being said, I am amazed how many people do not understand why we have marriage in the first place. While there are minor reasons, the main reason, the big elephant in the room, is children. Marriage is important because a man and woman can make babies. Since they make them, they own them. This is their privilege and their responsibility.

The reason why gay marriage doesn't make sense is they cannot produce babies. There are many other reasons but this is the big one. Nobody talks about this elephant in the room. They will debate the small reasons and overlook this main one.

The reason for this is probably because this issue is not just about gay marriage but also divorce and sex outside marriage. Since so many in our country are guilty of these things, nobody wants to bring them up.

It is in the state's best interest to protect its future generations. The state need to know who is married to whom and which children belong to which parents. It should do things to help protect its greatest natural reasource. Special treatment for married couples is the result.

Our court system is in shambles because we allow people to mess up their lives with adultery and easy divorce. Millions of children suffer. Everybody else suffers indirectly too. Everybody knows our country is way out of line on this issue.

Until we get back to this base for marriage, we will never solve the gay marriage debate. We also need to fix all the other marriage/divorce issues too. With half of our adults in the US with some form of VD, we need to wake up and see the moral codes of old were not there just to deny us some fun. They were there for health reasons and the sake of our children.

For Apple or any other large corporation to get involved with this controversial issue shows their foolishness. It is a very bad business decision. If someone wants to support one side or the other, they should do so out of their private money, not a corporation's money. This is not just for Apple, but also for all other corporations.

I would think Apple users would also understand the argument of how important it is to look at this issue as a whole. Just as Apple tries to create a good complete solution by integrating hardware, software, and services, so too should we view marriage as one important piece of a much larger civilization solution.

Most people approach the marriage issue like a PC user - they grab at one issue and have no idea how it fits into the whole. Thus they hack together a society and wonder why it has bugs and crashes frequently. They then look at the five to ten percent of people who have a system that works and declare them some cult of fanatics, or something like that.

Now no person is perfect just like no computer, operating system, or application is perfect. But just like we Mac users know how much better working on a Mac is over Windows, so too people who follow the main moral code know their experience is so much better. We follow a system that is of superior design.

While someone might scoff at the phrase " the main moral code", everybody knows basically what it is and that we should follow it. We all have this inner gut feeling when we do the wrong thing. We just want to make one exception for ourself.

Of course most people do this and we end up with a society that has standardized on an inferior moral platform. Everybody then goes along with this view just because it is the most popular. Then all these issues become like apps where one doesn't play nice with others. They fight for system resources and the whole system crashes. Every app blames the other app and nobody ever realizes the whole platform is at fault.

One should throw out their faulty Windows moral foundation and switch to one that is "Mac-like". Then problems like the gay marriage issue disappear. I know this whole analogy goes against popular opinion that most Mac users are liberals, but many of us are not. Regardless, I firmly think the analogy still stands.

Unfortunately there are many people who claim to follow some religious or moral code and they introduce their own distorted faulty system. Of such systems there are many. But I am not talking about those burdensome ones when I refer to this main moral code. The good trees produce good apples. The bad trees have fruit filled with bugs. That is how we can separate the good ideas from the bad ideas. After all, that is how we can tell the good computer systems from the bad systems.
post #356 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by YTV View Post

Sorry I'm not religious. But I do recognize that things are either right or wrong.



Its so bad, bacause its wrong. Just like pedophilia is wrong. Just like stabbing random old ladies is wrong. Just like touching your sister is wrong. Its just plain wrong.

Why would I be scared they would make me gay? That is the stupidest thing I ever heard. Would I be scared of becoming a pedophile if pedophilia was legalized or becoming a crackhead if crack was legalized? Seriously thats the stupidest shi I ever heard and makes negative 2 ounces of sense.

Man do you have it wrong. Is being Gay just as wrong as being Black was in the 60s or being a Woman in the 80s. All these arguments, religious and not, are the same ones used against Black and Women's rights, just tweaked a little differently for this situation. Change is coming...GET USED TO IT!
post #357 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by visionary View Post

Lots of replays already and lots of emotion. Obviously this topic strikes a nerve. I would think a company of Apple's size would do best to shy away from this controversy. Not good for business at all.

You have to figure how many people will respect Apple more now for this and consider their elitist, liberal clientelle, then minus the people won't now buy an Apple product are probably not Apple's key demographic anyway and then minus the people that aren't going to care one way or another how Apple feels about these civil liberties.

Have the anti-gay groups stopped buying newspapers and stopped using Google as their search engine because of this?

PS: This might all be a ruse to turn people away from the lack of FW on the new MacBook.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #358 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by Namdnal Siroj View Post

Prop no 8 is about ammending state law to disallow certain federal rights. Isn't it?
Or what is this thread about do you think?

The right to marry is a civil right. Just like free speech or the freedom of the press. When the CA supreme court said that the gay marriage ban was unconstitutional they said churches could believe what ever they wanted. From a LEGAL stand point marriage is going to be between two people. Religions can still believe what they want and practice how they will. People have already tried sueing the Catholics for not letting woman be priests, didn't work. SO for ALL OF YOU RELIGIOUS NUTS OUT THERE....CALM DOWN!! Homosexuals and heterosexuals a like won't be able to sue you little b.s. church. Churches like businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone. As long as they don't kick them out for sexual orientation then they CANNOT get sued.
post #359 of 1350
Quote:
Originally Posted by visionary View Post

Lots of replays already and lots of emotion. Obviously this topic strikes a nerve. I would think a company of Apple's size would do best to shy away from this controversy. Not good for business at all.

That being said, I am amazed how many people do not understand why we have marriage in the first place. While there are minor reasons, the main reason, the big elephant in the room, is children. Marriage is important because a man and woman can make babies. Since they make them, they own them. This is their privilege and their responsibility.

The reason why gay marriage doesn't make sense is they cannot produce babies. There are many other reasons but this is the big one. Nobody talks about this elephant in the room. They will debate the small reasons and overlook this main one.

The reason for this is probably because this issue is not just about gay marriage but also divorce and sex outside marriage. Since so many in our country are guilty of these things, nobody wants to bring them up.

It is in the state's best interest to protect its future generations. The state need to know who is married to whom and which children belong to which parents. It should do things to help protect its greatest natural reasource. Special treatment for married couples is the result.

Our court system is in shambles because we allow people to mess up their lives with adultery and easy divorce. Millions of children suffer. Everybody else suffers indirectly too. Everybody knows our country is way out of line on this issue.

Until we get back to this base for marriage, we will never solve the gay marriage debate. We also need to fix all the other marriage/divorce issues too. With half of our adults in the US with some form of VD, we need to wake up and see the moral codes of old were not there just to deny us some fun. They were there for health reasons and the sake of our children.

For Apple or any other large corporation to get involved with this controversial issue shows their foolishness. It is a very bad business decision. If someone wants to support one side or the other, they should do so out of their private money, not a corporation's money. This is not just for Apple, but also for all other corporations.

I would think Apple users would also understand the argument of how important it is to look at this issue as a whole. Just as Apple tries to create a good complete solution by integrating hardware, software, and services, so too should we view marriage as one important piece of a much larger civilization solution.

Most people approach the marriage issue like a PC user - they grab at one issue and have no idea how it fits into the whole. Thus they hack together a society and wonder why it has bugs and crashes frequently. They then look at the five to ten percent of people who have a system that works and declare them some cult of fanatics, or something like that.

Now no person is perfect just like no computer, operating system, or application is perfect. But just like we Mac users know how much better working on a Mac is over Windows, so too people who follow the main moral code know their experience is so much better. We follow a system that is of superior design.

While someone might scoff at the phrase " the main moral code", everybody knows basically what it is and that we should follow it. We all have this inner gut feeling when we do the wrong thing. We just want to make one exception for ourself.

Of course most people do this and we end up with a society that has standardized on an inferior moral platform. Everybody then goes along with this view just because it is the most popular. Then all these issues become like apps where one doesn't play nice with others. They fight for system resources and the whole system crashes. Every app blames the other app and nobody ever realizes the whole platform is at fault.

One should throw out their faulty Windows moral foundation and switch to one that is "Mac-like". Then problems like the gay marriage issue disappear. I know this whole analogy goes against popular opinion that most Mac users are liberals, but many of us are not. Regardless, I firmly think the analogy still stands.

Unfortunately there are many people who claim to follow some religious or moral code and they introduce their own distorted faulty system. Of such systems there are many. But I am not talking about those burdensome ones when I refer to this main moral code. The good trees produce good apples. The bad trees have fruit filled with bugs. That is how we can separate the good ideas from the bad ideas. After all, that is how we can tell the good computer systems from the bad systems.

oh please. like Apple, Google, or any other company is going to go under for supporting one proposition. Our society is too ignorant and I bet half the people walking around this country won't even know that Apple has donated to this cause. Honestly if there was no religions the world would be a much better case. Tell me about any major world issue in the last 2000 years where religion has not played a significant role in its happening!!
post #360 of 1350
I've spent a lot of time today reading shameful, hateful Apple forums, both here and at macrumors.com, rife with people using God and Jesus to justify their bigotry. It's absolutely sickening, but ultimately why man created the one true god in the first place: to establish and push agendas on one another in order to galvanize large masses of otherwise disparate individuals. I believe it was a necessary evil of the times as human beings were moving into larger, more complex social structures. And, even if we haven't grown out of this outmoded paradigm, this crutch, as a species, surely any of these zealots can see that a literal interpretation of the bible would have us reverting to laws about slavery and women's rights that are not in any way justifiable, correct, or moral. This puts any argument around the validity of using a moral compass from 2000+ years ago into doubt. The Bible is a product of the times, and those times, literally represented, were abhorrent in so many ways. We've grown from then, in general, and I am ever hopeful that we will continue to grow more wise with every passing day in pursuit of peace, love and equality.

Whether you agree or disagree with Apple's stance, suggesting that Apple should ignore an issue of rights that affects their Californian employees, HR, and their ongoing recruitment efforts, is foolish. This is an important business issue. Whether the cons of taking a stance on such a polarizing issue outweigh the benefits is certainly worth arguing.

If not in my time, then future generations will be able to look back on this as a brave and forward thinking decision on Apple's part. I commend them for taking a stand that may cost them some customers in the short term and am ever hopeful that it will actually gain them more.

Peace.
Lee
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple contributes $100,000 to fight California's No on 8 battle