Apple contributes $100,000 to fight California's No on 8 battle - Page 23

And your source for that is? Actually, you have no source, as the majority of American people have already voted against gay marriage. Check out the states that ban it, and don't forget to add California and Arizona, come next Tuesday.

Congratulations,I hope you and frugality have twins,one boy and one other boy.You might be one of the lucky ones,remember if one of them turns out gay,there's a fifty percent chance the other will be gay too.

Rave on, I'm near 70, and my kids are probably older than you are. No gays in the lot. What you really hope is to turn around our society, and your plans are falling flat on their face.

I don't care if you want to be gay, but you aren't going to sully the word marriage by including same sex partners in the contract. Got AIDS yet?

You should be asking the Praying Mantis frugality that question,not me.

I look forward to reading the demographic reports of prop 8 relating to age.Your times numbered.

It is not a matter of religion forcing itself on the government, but the other way around. if Gay /marriage is allowed, ministers won't have the rite to refuse to marry a homosexual couple

Seriously, are you so thick you do not realise that by using blatant lies to push your views onto others the only thing you manage to do is to discredit yourself and your cause?

That's 100% wrong.The law in California made it clear that gay marriage does not force any churches to marry anybody that they don't want to marry.
"no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples,and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs." 183 P.2d. 384, 451-52 (2008)
article 1 ,section 4 already guarantees this in California.

Are your kids or grandkids amongst the 1/3 of all new AIDS cases in America last year which spread through male-female contact?

For christians, a lot of them sure don't have a problem bearing false witness to support their bigotry.

This is good in a way, because yes enabling gay people to marry gives them more rights to benefits, tax, insurance deals together than say two single men just living in a house together...
however, why have Apple got involved? Is this to win some more people over to their company?
I thought it was standard practise for companies to stand neutral to political events as such.

Hmm, nearly 70, that explains a lot. It must be very difficult for you to accept all the changes in society since WW2. Civil rights for black Americans, the legalisation of interracial marriage, abortion, homosexuality, and civil partnerships. It's a lot to take in, as, judging by your comments on here, you would have opposed a fair few, if not all, of these changes.

Proposition 8 may well pass on Tuesday, but one day soon it will be overturned and will be added to the list of advancements that make the world a fairer, more equal place.


You cannot possibly know this.

As you perceive homosexuals to be perverts they wouldn't be most unlikely to tell you if they were gay.
If there are more than 20 members in your family, then there is a high probability that at least one is gay, and sadly, they will feel that they have to hide this fact from you.


Too late; society has already been turned around since you were a boy back in the 1940s.
Gay marriage is just one of the few remaining steps on the road to full equality


Nobody wants to be gay, just as nobody wants to be straight. We are what we are; what we want to be doesn't come into it.


No, and nor have the vast majority of homosexuals.

Got Alzheimer's yet?

OT Spell checking this post suggests the word 'sinful' for your username

While not illegal, it's highly unethical, just as General Electric using it's power and money to elect Obama.

Who was the moron that said this issue would not affect citizens?

<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,445865,00.html>

Hmm... On top of it being from Fox News, there is something fishy about that article.

PS: While I don't agree with your stance on gay rights, I do respect your decision. However, one thing I will not tolerate is the lack of hyperlinking of websites.

Hahaha, because teaching kids tolerance is bad, really bad. Who is the moron, you idiot?

Also as usual Fox News and its fair and balanced news. What a surprise!!

Tolerance is certainly a good thingwhich does seems to be an alien concept to most people who follow an organized religionbut the specifics of the article are well beyond the abilities of the average 5yo.

Beyond that, Zinfella shouldn't be taking this article as proof of anything (even if it is real), as there are plenty of rogue, extremist acts on the right and the left that make one's campaign look bad. To say no to Prop 8 will not alter heterosexual marriage or alter the way state supported schools teach children.

I guess you are aware of some kids using the word gay as synonymous of something bad but without the intent of being homophobic. Teaching them that the use of the word gay in that context is offensive to many people is not inappropriate even if they are just 5 years old.

This is the pledge card that kids were asked to sing.



How the person who wrote the article makes the connection that by asking kids to sign the cards they are supporting gays is beyond me but it is no surprise since it comes from Fox News. Tolerance is not the same as support.

That is my point. Having a 5yo sign a card that states things like anti-LGBT, transgender, and bisexual on it when they aren't using the term in a homophobic way is, well...... gay. There is nothing wrong with having homonyms in our language, which ironically seems to be the biggest factor with many people that support Prop 8; they don't mind gay rights, they just don't want it being called 'marriage'.

Schools shouldn't tolerate homophobia but this concept, as presented by Fox News (which is speculative in itself), doesn't seem healthy and I'm sure it's not shared by most people who oppose homosexual rights.

Agreed.The cards were intended for middle school and high school graders and were never meant to be given to kindergartners.
Personally,I don't think schools should play any role in sex education for kids (except in biology class) That should be up to the parents.It gives lazy or pathetic parents an excuse for not educating their kids,which is far too common already.Certainly provide training for teachers who could offer advice for those students who seek it though.
I have no problem with children being taught about descrimination of all kinds,but only when they're old enough and in history or modern or social studies not signing some retarded pledge!
Trust Fox News to try and use this misleading news story,how appropriate! No wonder zinfella has the brains of a kindergartner.

Good on Apple for helping fight the religious freaks that keep trying to mess in other people's relationships.

Who is the moron who uses a link to Fox News as evidence of ANYTHING?

As an old man, you do recall when news wasn't simply meant to shock and entertain, don't you? Can't blame you though. American news is pretty much an oxymoron nowadays.

<snip>
This explains A LOT! Wouldn't you rather be out there living a happy life instead of here, displaying your bitterness and intolerance? Not much time left, you know.

BTW, suggesting that all gay people are on their path to contracting AIDS is like saying all old people are senile, bitter, croggedy farts who've lost their bladder control. However, since we're stereotyping, yours seems to fit quite well.

And every state in the South voted to allow slavery. Why did we revisit that issue, then?

Because it was discriminatory.

We could have a federal constitutional amendment to allow slavery... why don't you push for that?

Forbidding one consenting loving couple from sharing the same benefits, in name and in law, as another consenting loving couple is discriminatory.

If there is an amendment now, it will be overturned soon, as the old farts die off.

Why? Because discrimination is discrimination, and we are advancing as a society.

It was religious conservatives (yes, some of them were democrats) who wanted slavery to be legal.
It was religious conservatives who wanted segregation to be legal.
It was religious conservatives who wanted interracial marriage to be illegal.
It was religious conservatives who want same-sex marriage to be illegal.

It is the religious conservatives who are always behind the curve in terms of equal rights.

A quick look through some YouTube comments, as well as comments on this board, will show that ignorance and naiveté isn't only the preserve of 5 year olds.

The oh-so-typically-American use of "fag" (plus numerous variants involving, for example the word "butt") as an insult says a lot about how closed-minded, unlearned and prejudiced those in the Land of the Free* can be.


* Terms and conditions apply.

<http://townhall.com/columnists/FrankTurek/2008/11/01/born_gay_or_a_gay_basher_no_excuse>

You're embarrassing yourself. Fox News is more fair and balanced than any other network, as shown by independent audits. I'm sure you prefer the far left media anyway, as that's where the fringe left loves to hangout, and where lies trump truth.

1) Why would you purposely try to prevent the forum from parsing your links?

2) Associating NAMBLA's rape with a normal homosexual male, is like associating the rape of a female child with a normal heterosexual male.

3) Don't be so daft to think 'being born gay" is a term that means that genes are the only way to be born gay. We are considerably more complex organisms than that. The term is really just colloquial to infer that it's not a choice one makes, but one that is part of that person's natural biological makeup, perhaps even just a normal variation in the way 'God' created us to teach us about tolerance. If you aren't tolerant you may need to pay Charon for your ferryboat ride across the river Styx.

4) I'd like to know at what age you choose NOT to be gay. What is a hard choice for you to make? Did you struggle with your sexuality for awhile? Did you visit bath houses in your younger days until you got your fill... literally?

The attempt here was to shoot the messenger, Fox News, instead of the message. Here's my source for using Fox New as a source.

<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,445846,00.html>

As I said above, it's an independent audit of the media.

Now to your rhetoric above. It's not even worth a response, and I'm pretty sure that you know that.

Isn't it clear? Zinfella believes it's a choice because at one point, he chose to be straight, against his natural urges. It's become obvious his homophobia is the result of years of repressed homosexual tendencies, like when a gay basher is acting out because of his own self hatred. It's sad that he's almost 70 and never got a chance to deal with it and it's an example of why Californians should fight against Prop 8.

Of course, I'm embarrassing myself for thinking that Fox News is anything but fair and balanced or for thinking that every human being should have the same rights and obligations. You may fool yourself but that is as far as it goes. The rest of the people can see you for what you really are, a bigoted homophobic miserable man.

Oh, you blasphemous heathens! How dare you fail to bow down in acquiescence to Fox News' diktat! Don't you know that Bill O'Reilly is proof that there's a God? You will all fry in Hell!

Speaking of O'Reilly, this video always makes me laugh...

•

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY

It takes chutzpah to call someone that does not support deviates a bigot. You, and the rest of the gay community, are in the decided minority in this country, but you're just to self absorbed to know it.

No, it only takes reading your posts.

Speaking of NAMBLA and your dislike for Obama, here is pic that might help fuel some fire for you.

Just remember, in 2000 and 2004, the polls were wrong. Typically, just like Obama, you guys are counting your chickens before they're hatched. I've already voted for McCain, not because particularly like him, but because Obama is a Marxist. Maybe you guys haven't been around long enough to know what that means, but you can bet your a$$ that I have. Obama is 100% platitudes, and no substance, he has not track record of doing what he promises to do. Indeed he has been THE most partisan, left wing Senator in the US Senate. He has NO record of crossing the isle as he claims. Not that I think you guys care anything about facts.

u
1% of the US population owns 40% of it's wealth.The top 5% of the US population own 80% of it's wealth. Bush and McCain want to give that 1%, 43% of their multi trillion dollar tax cuts whilst 40% of the population,who are the least wealthy get almost nothing,an average of just $115 each annually (just more screwed) Barack Obama wants to give a bigger tax break to those who have less.And John McCain originally voted against Bush's tax cut, saying it was unfair to expect the burden on the poorer 50% of the population to pay more in taxes whilst the top 1% save on average annually approximately $46,000 on an income of $700,000 a year and there considered poor in that group.That means that through Bush/McCain the top 1% get 36% (43% withoutht any estate taxes) of the tax cut even though they only pay 20% of the total taxes.This doesn't even factor in that a quarter of the tax cut is in estate tax which it is estimated that the top 1% income earners pay 91% of.Only 2 in a hundred estates qualify to pay any taxes at all.

Joe the plumber,filed earnings of $48,000 and would pay less in taxes through Obama than McCain. If he bought that business and filed earnings of $250,000 he would pay $300 more than he currently would have to pay,but that's hardly Marxist!
Remember also that Europe has a GDP of $16 trillion to America's $14 trillion.I suspect Marxism is to blame for that.America's debt is about 40% higher than Europe and to make it worse the US has just had a month of negative growth,which will continue,and get worse making that debt even harder to pay off.You can thank Bush/McCain for that.

It's amazing how these idiots can be brainwashed into using these Fox News buzzwords like "Marxism" in a public forum while simultaneously revealing that they don't have a single idea in Hell what it means!

If by that they mean someone is not a doctrinaire Smithist, and doesn't advocate the blind following of laissez-faire, dog-eat-dog, let-them-eat-cake, Robber-Baron-capitalist dogma right off a cliff (as the Rethuglicans have had us doing since that venomous pustule Reagan got in), then he's a "Marxist."

Get off of Fox News and join us in the real world, where words have meanings and nothing "trickles down;" it's all sucked UP!

Isn't age supposed to bring wisdom? Evidently not if Fox News has any say.

Marxist!?

How can our education system and media fail so miserably?

Guys I have to upset you: actually many religions ban homosexualism (catholicism and other christians, judaism and i suppose islam. in case of christianity it's stated clearly in bible). So apple says it isn't religious issue, but they are wrong. So discussing this topic has no sense at all, since these religions constitute over 2/3.

Of course it seems that homosexual fraction is very aggressive
and unfortunatelly they insult other mac users in this forum . I think that AppleInsider Admins should do something with this.
Again it's very bad for apple.