Tim Cook 'deeply disappointed' by new Indiana anti-gay law

191012141528

Comments

  • Reply 221 of 551
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    magman1979 wrote: »
    This law empowers businesses to discriminate against others, pure and simple. Get a clue before you open your mouth next time. I'm not even a US citizen and I understand this better than you!

    Exactly! It gives businesses the freedom to do business with those they have no objection to. That is far better than being forced to do business with people you find objectionable.
  • Reply 222 of 551
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

    I didn't say I condoned it; only that I understood it.


     

    You sound like Anjem Choudary talking about ISIS.

  • Reply 223 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    Homosexuality, just like child molestation {amongst other practices}, is deviant sexuality. So you need to ask yourself, can you deal with the idea that you MUST do business with all sexual deviants no matter how off base they are? Further are you really free if you must do business with people through the decree of any law?



    I really don't see anything wrong with this law. In many ways it gives people that don't have a problem with gays a business advantage. Those that do object are then free to succeed or fail.



    Is there actually such a thing as "normal" sexuality? Let's face it, all people are weird when it comes to sex.

  • Reply 224 of 551
    kent909kent909 Posts: 731member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    Homosexuality, just like child molestation {amongst other practices}, is deviant sexuality. So you need to ask yourself, can you deal with the idea that you MUST do business with all sexual deviants no matter how off base they are? Further are you really free if you must do business with people through the decree of any law?



    I really don't see anything wrong with this law. In many ways it gives people that don't have a problem with gays a business advantage. Those that do object are then free to succeed or fail.

    Step 1     Allow discrimination in business

    Step 2     Make them sit in the back of the bus

    Step 3     Oh what the heck let's just lynch them

    Step 4     Open up concentration camps and kill them in mass like Germany did with the Jews.

     

    Does Indiana really have a problem?  If I was gay and I went into a restaurant and the owner or employee expressed their dislike for me, I would just go elsewhere. This is not( at least yet) a widespread problem. It is just a few ignorant people who got the ear of an ignorant governor and thorough their fears were able to effect something political. I doubt that widespread discrimination exists anymore in Indiana than any other state. But if anyone thinks that having this victory they will not move on to the next step they are missing the point. It's not step one that is the problem, it where it will ultimately lead if not checked.

  • Reply 225 of 551
    boltsfan17boltsfan17 Posts: 2,294member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by kent909 View Post

     

    Step 1     Allow discrimination in business

    Step 2     Make them sit in the back of the bus

    Step 3     Oh what the heck let's just lynch them

    Step 4     Open up concentration camps and kill them in mass like Germany did with the Jews.

     

    Does Indiana really have a problem?  If I was gay and I went into a restaurant and the owner or employee expressed their dislike for me, I would just go elsewhere. This is not( at least yet) a widespread problem. It is just a few ignorant people who got the ear of an ignorant governor and thorough their fears were able to effect something political. I doubt that widespread discrimination exists anymore in Indiana than any other state. But if anyone thinks that having this victory they will not move on to the next step they are missing the point. It's not step one that is the problem, it where it will ultimately lead if not checked.


    You need to read the law, Civil Rights Act, and federal law. It has always been legal in Indiana to refuse service to gays.

  • Reply 226 of 551
    kent909kent909 Posts: 731member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Boltsfan17 View Post

     

    You need to read the law, Civil Rights Act, and federal law. It has always been legal in Indiana to refuse service to gays.


    You may be right, but I suspect that this action by a racist governor will soon lead to getting that loophole fixed. 

  • Reply 227 of 551
    fracfrac Posts: 480member
    Brilliant how some articles smoke out the dickheads, bigots, racists, xenophobes, political fruitcakes, climate change deniers and the socially dangerous. No real surprises, all the usual suspects are there with all the usual endless dissembling, lack of irony and over-blown self importance.
  • Reply 228 of 551
    Reading the replies here is depressing.

    1. separation of church and state. remember that?
    -- Indiana's law, marketed as the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act," lets businesses use "religious beliefs" as a defense in discrimination suits.


    ---2. it will be over-turned.
    --it was signed into law by Gov. Mike Pence earlier this week, sparking a flood of condemnation.


    ---3. these arguments are done. 100's of years ago. discrimination is a crime. even when it comes from the religious (isis, anyone?).


    ---4. ah, why bother… the usa is over… don't these 'professional' christians have something better to do all day?

  • Reply 229 of 551
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member

    "Gay" is not the same as "child molester" and that's a weak argument on your part.
    Not in the least. The point is we are talking about deviant behavior here. That is sexual drives that are not the norm. So you must ask yourself how far are you willing to go with your demand that business should be required to serve all comers?
    If you had said "people can choose to do business with whomever they want" and let it be, you'd be in the right.

    Im still right because the point here is the freedom to do business with those that you are willing to associate with.

    Look at it this way, say you own a hotel and a motor cycle gang comes into town and wants to stay at you hotel. Should you be required to lodge them? What if you are a member of a rival gang? If you say no then why? If you say no would you also refuse a conference for a bunch of child molesters? If you would then why all of a sudden must you do business with gays?

    On a side note many of the child molesters out there are indeed gay, so from that perspective the two are somewhat related.
  • Reply 230 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Expert Witness View Post



    Reading the replies here is depressing. 1. separation of church and state. remember that? Indiana's law, marketed as the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act," lets businesses use "religious beliefs" as a defense in discrimination suits. 2. it will be over-turned. it was signed into law by Gov. Mike Pence earlier this week, sparking a flood of condemnation. 3. these arguments are done. 100's of years ago. discrimination is a crime. even when it comes from the religious (isis, anyone?). 4. ah, why bother… the usa is over… don't these 'professional' christians have something better to do all day?



    As mentioned previously, it may violate the Establishment Clause.

  • Reply 231 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

     



    What does that have to do with the topic? There are people that donate organs to people everyday, many of which they don't even know or will never meet. Now that we have that out of the way it's still not a good idea for a CEO to be a vocal activist using a company he didn't create as power to back his own perennial agenda. 




    In other words: None.  

     

    Good to know.

  • Reply 232 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    So you would make a knife for a Satanic ritual to be used for the slaughter of a baby in the interests of treating people equally?

     

    Got it.




    An item to damage another human being?  No.  That's not my "thing."  I don't really give a crap about babies, but the less that little children are hurt the better.  Someone wants to smack me in the face, I don't like it, but OK.  I'll take it.  A kid?  No.  Just No.  

     

    I've faced up some tough bastards.  Someone wants to smack me around?  I guess that goes with the territory.  Punch me, let's fight, whatever.  I'm not saying that I'm some "badass" or anything.  The world is different than that.  But I grew up in Detroit, and I will take anyone -- I may get my ass kicked BAD -- but I will take anyone ass on.

  • Reply 233 of 551
    idreyidrey Posts: 647member
    Wow so these so called christians prefer to do business with child molester, rapist, murderers and all kinds of scumbags rather than gays? What and idiocracy! So many ignorant people create so many intolerant people. So many hypocrites that call them self christians. I do believe i should have the right to shoot everyone who disagrees with me, or those who i consider stupid, does that mean i should. I don't think so. I have to tolerate them and let them be.
  • Reply 234 of 551
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tmay View Post

     

    You mean the Constitution that was written a very long time ago by a bunch of landed White Men?

     

    Who could possibly imagine that it would need to evolve over centuries.




    That's why it's amended if needed.

  • Reply 235 of 551
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    In other words: None.  

     

    Good to know.




    This is the second time you didn't have a logical answer to my post. 

  • Reply 236 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

     



    This is the second time you didn't have a logical answer to my post. 




    Oh, believe me: I have some "logical" response to your post.

     

    I am just not interested in your racist crap.

  • Reply 237 of 551
    jdwjdw Posts: 1,156member
    AaronJ, Tim Cook and others shocked at the Indiana "freedom of association" law appear to have only a superficial understanding of what true FREEDOM is. True Freedom doesn't necessarily make everyone happy, but the existence of unhappiness over your neighbor's freedom doesn't mean you should seek to limit the freedom of everyone. An understanding of the U.S. Constiution is important, but how one INTERPRETS the Constitution is tied to their understanding of FREEDOM. Consider well that it is not Diversity or Tolerance that has traditionally made America great, as important as those two things are. No, FREEDOM made America great. That remains true even in light of the fact some Americans (not all) allowed an ancient evil to reign on American soil — slavery. Freedom loving Americans shed blood to eradicate that evil long ago. But if we can say America is not so great today, it would be due to our having given Big Brother increased control over us, taking away our freedoms as a result. All Americans must admit that both parties are responsible for restriction of individual liberty, one party via Warfare and the other via Welfare. This means that Americans themselves are responsible for a decline in individual liberty insofar as They The People vote for both parties perpetually, rarely thinking outside that self-made box. We vote "the lesser of evils" among whom we are told are "the most likely to get elected" while often rejecting the best candidates who advocate Liberty.

    Since existing law and the topic of skin color (i.e., Melanin content) was mentioned, it is important to know that (1) there's no such thing as Biological Race ("race" is only a man-made social construct), and (2) although tremendous good came from the American Civil Rights Act in the 1960's, it did in part replace one evil for another insofar as it empowered government to restrict property rights, which is why some Liberty proponents like Goldwater opposed it (such opposition having nothing at all to do with so-called "racism" or Melanin-based discrimination). As a result, we ought not to worship existing law or believe existing law must exist in its current firm perpetually. Laws change.

    Lastly and perhaps most importantly, here is what a Gay man who understands TRUE FREEDOM has to say (I would encourage you all to read it and contemplate it):

    http://tinyurl.com/oup5hsl

    Let FREEDOM reign. It's what Patrick Henry was willing to die for. Do you as an American love FREEDOM just as much?
  • Reply 238 of 551
    splifsplif Posts: 603member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

     



    This is the second time you didn't have a logical answer to my post. 


    Apple is legally bound to not discriminate due to sexual orientation. So Tim's comments are in line with corporate beliefs and American Law. Also, he is a citizen of this country and the planet so he is entitled to his first amendment rights and his opinion. If religious people do not want to do business with Apple on the grounds that Apple employs and sells it's products to gay people than they have the right to do so. If that is there belief than they probably wouldn't be able to buy most of the products sold on the planet. I wonder if all these religious cake makers know how many gay people have produced or had something to do with the products/services that they use to make their living. Are they going to boycott those products also? If they really believe what they say they believe than they should live by their convictions and do the same thing in all aspects of their business.

  • Reply 239 of 551
    idreyidrey Posts: 647member
    smurfman wrote: »
    NOT the same thing! I praise Indiana's governor. This will help good people defend themselves from militant homosexuals.

    These people/businesses serve gays unless it is aiding/supporting something that goes against what God has instituted. Homosexual MARRIAGE is such a thing.

    It's NOT an anti-gay law but protects against religious discrimination.


    You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do. ~Anne Lamott
  • Reply 240 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Splif View Post

     

    Apple is legally bound to not discriminate due to sexual orientation. So Tim's comments are in line with corporate beliefs and American Law. Also, he is a citizen of this country and the planet so he is entitled to his first amendment rights and his opinion. If religious people do not want to do business with Apple on the grounds that Apple employs and sells it's products to gay people than they have the right to do so. If that is there belief than they probably wouldn't be able to buy most of the products sold on the planet. I wonder if all these religious cake makers know how many gay people have produced or had something to do with the products/services that they use to make their living. Are they going to boycott those products also? If they really believe what they say they believe than they should live by their convictions and do the same thing in all aspects of their business.




    "Corporate beliefs"?

Sign In or Register to comment.