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

1679111228

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 551
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

     



    The fact that Tim Cook is the CEO of a company that does business around the world he should be careful.


     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     



    I do get what you're saying and I still disagree. Tim isn't the president of the United States. His duty to Apple and the shareholders is to keep the company profitable.


     

    If you're unhappy with Tim, take your money elsewhere. That's capitalism for you.

     

    This is a guy producing record profits for shareholders. 

  • Reply 162 of 551
    9secondko9secondko Posts: 929member
    Its
    aaronj wrote: »

    Are you from the US?  Because if so, then your understanding of the constitutional reality of this country is seriously messed up.  <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Let's say you own a restaurant.  You don't want to "associate" with black people.  Do you really think that you can ban black people from your restaurant?</span>


    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">The fact is, the 800 lb. elephant in the room is this: These proposals (and now laws, like in Indiana) talk </span>
    about<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> "religious" people not wanting </span>
    to serve "sinners."  Well, guess what?  A basic tenet of Christianity is that EVERYONE is a sinner.  So, in other words, if these merchants really lived up to their "beliefs" then they would serve NO ONE.  Adulterer?  No way.  Alcoholic?  Nope.  Someone who says, "God damn!" Uh-uh.  Anyone who has a tattoo?  That's not going to happen.

    Go read Leviticus some day.  

    Tim Cook is not only a good leader of Apple, he's a good man who believes in equality and, more importantly, people being decent to one and other.  It's sad that you can't understand that.

    tzterri wrote: »
    not about discriminating against "poor hungry people at a restaurant." It's about protecting the right to morality for say... A church board who is protected from HAVING to hire a "pastor" who practices something completely against the tenets he is supposed to proclaim and uphold.

    And that's a mistske concerning what the Bible teaches about people. It's actually; Everyone is a sinner until born again through faith in Jesus Christ. Then the Bible says you are a new creation. Having Jesus' tightsousnes credited to you before God and having the ability to live a life pleasing to God instead of contrary.

    And Jesus met with prostitutes, tax collectors, lawyers, thieves, etc. Because He loved them and wanted to see them saved and having the life God intended. While he certainly fed them, taught them, and healed them, he didn't have them put into positions of authority in His church until they were born again.

    People like to have knee jerk reactions when Christians stand up for righteousness. And coming lately miss the point. People don't care about what's really right. They care about what they want. That's why Jesus was rejected and crucified then. It's the same now.

    This law isn't discriminatory. It's protection from those who hold high moral values from being forced to see their convictions trampled on. And glad to see it happen in this day and age where good is called evil and evil is called good. But I expect some nefarious tampering and high level unconstitutional pressure will see it overturned. As Obama so cleverly forced Christians to fund abortion eith "Obamacare." Enough is enough.

    People with morals. Especially biblical values are sick of being railroaded.
  • Reply 163 of 551
    chadbag wrote: »
    It is not an anti-gay law. That is misinformation.

    It is a law for freedom of association. You cannot force people to associate with people they don't want to associate with.

    It's the reverse of "freedom of association" because the person being discriminated against is being denied association. What it really is is an attempt to discriminate under the cover of religion. Christians have used that old argument against jews and moslems for centuries. This law is toast in modern America.

    On a broader view I hope the Indiana mess continues to fester and blow the "Party of Angry Old White Men's" little tin ship out of the water in 2016.
  • Reply 164 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    Yes, they were friends.  But for one man to offer up his life (potentially) for another man is pretty intense.

     

    How many times have you offered your life for someone else?


     

    This isn't about you or me, this is about Tim using his CEO position at Apple for a political purpose.

  • Reply 165 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     



    No because Apple does not discriminate against anyone, even bigots.


     

    That's a good defensible position.

  • Reply 166 of 551
    waterrocketswaterrockets Posts: 1,231member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post



    It's actually; Everyone is a sinner until born again through faith in Jesus Christ. Then the Bible says you are a new creation. 

     

    Where is this in the bible, exactly, that there are people walking among us without sin?

  • Reply 167 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichL View Post

     

     

     

    If you're unhappy with Tim, take your money elsewhere. That's capitalism for you.

     

    This is a guy producing record profits for shareholders. 


     

    I'm quite happy with the company's profitability and have no intention to sell my stock at this time only to get stuck with a massive tax liability.

  • Reply 168 of 551
    waterrocketswaterrockets Posts: 1,231member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

     

    This isn't about you or me, this is about Tim using his CEO position at Apple for a political purpose.


     

    Show me a CEO who doesn't play politics with the position.

  • Reply 169 of 551
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,716member
    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.
    Militant Homosexual? Are you for real?
  • Reply 170 of 551
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,716member
    9secondko wrote: »
    Its

    not about discriminating against "poor hungry people at a restaurant." It's about protecting the right to morality for say... A church board who is protected from HAVING to hire a "pastor" who practices something completely against the tenets he is supposed to proclaim and uphold.

    And that's a mistske concerning what the Bible teaches about people. It's actually; Everyone is a sinner until born again through faith in Jesus Christ. Then the Bible says you are a new creation. Having Jesus' tightsousnes credited to you before God and having the ability to live a life pleasing to God instead of contrary.

    And Jesus met with prostitutes, tax collectors, lawyers, thieves, etc. Because He loved them and wanted to see them saved and having the life God intended. While he certainly fed them, taught them, and healed them, he didn't have them put into positions of authority in His church until they were born again.

    People like to have knee jerk reactions when Christians stand up for righteousness. And coming lately miss the point. People don't care about what's really right. They care about what they want. That's why Jesus was rejected and crucified then. It's the same now.

    This law isn't discriminatory. It's protection from those who hold high moral values from being forced to see their convictions trampled on. And glad to see it happen in this day and age where good is called evil and evil is called good. But I expect some nefarious tampering and high level unconstitutional pressure will see it overturned. As Obama so cleverly forced Christians to fund abortion eith "Obamacare." Enough is enough.

    People with morals. Especially biblical values are sick of being railroaded.
    Uh-oh. Who let the militant Christians in?
  • Reply 171 of 551
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

     

    This isn't about you or me, this is about Tim using his CEO position at Apple for a political purpose.




    How many times have you potentially give up your life for someone else?

     

    Answer.

  • Reply 172 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    How many times have you potentially give up your life for someone else?

     

    Answer.




    There's no possible way that can be answered. I may have done something in the past that I viewed as a charitable act and it may have resulted in a negative consequence or a "lifesaving" consequence. I have no idea and you should stop being ridiculous. Also, donating a body part is not the same as jumping on a hand grenade, and as I said Tim and Steve were friends.

  • Reply 173 of 551
    9secondko wrote: »
    it's not about discriminating against "poor hungry people at a restaurant." It's about protecting the right to morality for say... A church board who is protected from HAVING to hire a "pastor" who practices something completely against the tenets he is supposed to proclaim and uphold.

    Your example is BS because no religious organization would even have to deal with that - discrimination is protected in that situation.
    And that's a mistske concerning what the Bible teaches about people. It's actually; Everyone is a sinner until ...bla bla bla

    Hate to bust your bubble but that crap was added to Christianity about 600 CE... The alternate belief in Christianity at that time was that we were created in God's image and therefore inherently sinless... Unfortunately the "sinful" doctrine won out because it made better business (cash flow) sense than the latter.
    And Jesus met with prostitutes, tax collectors, lawyers, thieves, etc. Because He loved them and wanted to see them saved and having the life God intended. While he certainly fed them, taught them, and healed them, he didn't have them put into positions of authority in His church until they were born again.

    More BS. There were no authority positions in His church until Paul. He didn't even elevate the disciples above carriers of his message. Jesus associated with everyone to show no one was outside of God's love.
    People like to have knee jerk reactions when Christians stand up for righteousness. And coming lately miss the point. People don't care about what's really right. They care about what they want. That's why Jesus was rejected and crucified then. It's the same now.

    You nailed it there...only the "people" you refer to are Christians who want to set themselves above other people who seem different.
    This law isn't discriminatory. It's protection from those who hold high moral values from being forced to see their convictions trampled on. And glad to see it happen in this day and age where good is called evil and evil is called good. But I expect some nefarious tampering and high level unconstitutional pressure will see it overturned. As Obama so cleverly forced Christians to fund abortion eith "Obamacare." Enough is enough.

    People with morals. Especially biblical values are sick of being railroaded.

    Oh, you play the victim wonderfully... even when you're not.
  • Reply 174 of 551
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RichL View Post

     

     

     

    If you're unhappy with Tim, take your money elsewhere. That's capitalism for you.

     

    This is a guy producing record profits for shareholders. 




    No one said we were unhappy with him as a CEO. Maybe you should actually read what we post. 

  • Reply 175 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by waterrockets View Post

     

     

    Show me a CEO who doesn't play politics with the position.




    Show me all of the CEOs who have done the same as Cook has done here. Of course he is taking a political stance. My point is that this stance detracts from Apple and Apple's products...unless this particular stance has been 'workshopped' and will result in an additional quantifiable increase in sales? Tim has previously stated that he does things because they are right and he ignores the ROI. Well, that simply makes no sense. He can AFFORD to ignore the ROI because they are so profitable. Were they not so profitable, I guarantee the company would remain laser-focused on sales.

  • Reply 176 of 551
     

    This isn't about you or me, this is about Tim using his CEO position at Apple for a political purpose.

    Show me a CEO who doesn't play politics with the position.

    I don't think Tim would have done anything differently if the Indiana governor were Dem or GOP, it wasn't politics; it was defending strong basic values of the humanity of every living person. Either everyone is to be considered equally valuable or we are only one step from owning slaves again.
  • Reply 177 of 551
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,407member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post





    I don't think Tim would have done anything differently if the Indiana governor were Dem or GOP, it wasn't politics; it was defending strong basic values of the humanity of every living person. Either everyone is to be considered equally valuable or we are only one step from owning slaves again.



    Tim, like every person on Earth since the beginning of human history, is acting in his own self-interest and he can certainly afford to do so considering the position and current profitability of the company.

  • Reply 178 of 551
    lmgslmgs Posts: 63member
    The government has no right to tell any business who they have to do business with.. If you own a business, and don't want to do business with someone, for ANY reason, then that should be your right.. If enough people don't like it, you will go out of business.. That's what freedom, and America, is all about..

    I'm from Arkansas, and fully support the governor... I don't hate anyone, but I do love freedom...
  • Reply 179 of 551
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    How many times have you potentially give up your life for someone else?

     

    Answer.




    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. 

  • Reply 180 of 551
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by viclauyyc View Post



    Way to go Indiana. The next step is to stone the gay/black/Asian/Islam etc....

     

     

    I don't think that would be a good next step.

     

    They do stone adulterers in some places, though. I can understand why.

Sign In or Register to comment.