Apple, Inc. asks Arizona governor to veto state gay discrimination bill

1235715

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 294
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    There are none so blind as those who will not see.

    I suggest you read Scripture carefully.


    It denounces those who reject what is their natural state and act unnaturally in defiance of their god. The 'abomination' as you so quaintly describe it is the rejection of that which God has given. Since most homosexuals are what they are not through any act of rebellion or choice, it would, in actual fact, be an abomination for them to be forced to be anything other than they are. 

    To go further, Jesus Christ preached acceptance of people as well as forgiveness and tolerance. He didn't once mention homosexuality, but what he DID say was that we should all take the beams of wood out of our own eyes before we start trying to pick specks of dust out of other people's eyes. He said this most emphatically and he appeared to have been annoyed when he said it: to that extent, you, I and everyone else have no business whatsoever in judging the actions of other people and deciding to withhold services or reject or discriminate. 

    This 'religious tolerance' bill, far from protecting people who are Christian is demonstrably and unarguably acting in contravention of the fundamental faith these people profess to believe in. In other words, they're all thundering hypocrites. 

    Apple is absolutely correct to object to this bill. Whether it does so for business reasons, political ones or simply out of an abundance of human charity and love, it is absolutely correct.

    By the way, I'm a committed Christian myself. I've read the Bible from cover to cover. There is nothing in it to support homophobia, discrimination and intolerance. Jesus Christ would be furious with a lot of the people who profess to speak in His name.

    This subject gets me angry.

    I agree completely. I, too, am I committed Christian and it angers me as well. People come to know Christ because of our actions and our relationships. Who wants to have a relationship with someone who hates and judges. We are called to have relationships and that's what leads them to Christ- not by bible thumping.
  • Reply 82 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post

     

    Good old common sense by the good old boy's is what created slavery, a multiple class system, the degradation of women, wars and hatred throughout the world. The problem with your rights are they aren't your rights but ours. Nobody is on this earth alone, WE are here to work together to exist. When the special interest group (SIG) of intolerant bigots attempt to take away the rights of others to live the way they want to, everyone needs to stand up and remind this SIG that they don't rule the world and they need to respect the actions of others. If you want to believe in something, fine, go ahead, and don't enact a law that keeps me from believing the way I want to.


     

    You mean, rich white men?

     

    They just happened to be the Pharisees that the Bible spoke against? Then yes, I agree.

  • Reply 83 of 294
    wovelwovel Posts: 956member
    0yvind wrote: »
    That said, I stand with the Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Word of God, who calls homosexuality an abomination in his holy scriptures.

    If you had even bothered to read the Bible you'd know that Jesus didn't say One word against homosexuality.
    You could be refering to the Old Testament - but according to that slavery is OK, so maybe you want Arizona to re-introduce that as well? Don't even start me on all the things the Bible calls an abomination: Eating shrimps and other kinds of shell fish, eating pork, letting women talk in congregations... If we were to live by the Bible word-by-word the society would return to the dark ages. No christian wants that (presumably), so why single out being gay?

    You forgot to mention this is not a news site :)
  • Reply 84 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Can someone explain exactly what this bill is and why it's being opposed? If I'm a vegetarian who is morally opposed to killing animals for food and I own a restaurant does Apple think I should be forced to serve meat since not doing so would be discriminating against meat eaters? If I own a photography studio and do weddings but am morally opposed to gay marriage should I be forced to photograph gay weddings even if it goes against my beliefs because not doing do would be discriminating against gays? Even if there are 100 other photography studios that would have no problem at all doing gay weddings? I'm just trying to understand what PC bandwagon Apple is jumping on here.

     

    Great points! As a firm believer in liberty, I don't believe that any business owner should be forced to change their business practices to suit the whims of others. None of us is entitled to the good, services, or labors of others. A private business is different than the government (only one place to get a driver's license, etc.).

  • Reply 85 of 294
    While the bill has it's flaws, the intent of the bill is only being looked at from one side in the media... I keep on hearing people refer to the bill as "legalizing discrimination against homosexuals," but what about the reverse which is, in some effect, legalizing a crushing blow to a person's freedom of religion? A business owner should not live in fear of a civil lawsuit when they feel they have to stand up for what they believe is right by refusing service to someone. That's what they are trying to protect.

    There are nuances in how to deal with this, however... I am a Christian, and work in a local computer shop in a very conservative state, but never in a million years would I think that providing service to a homosexual person would compromise my religious beliefs. I think it would be wrong to deny them service. That's the nature of my business. But if I was, say, a wedding photographer in New Mexico (and this really happened), and a gay couple wanted me to shoot photos of their wedding, I would feel deeply conflicted about what to do, because I believe that homosexual marriage is wrong, and participating in a celebration of something that I believe is wrong would be tantamount to accepting it. This is the problem people face whose businesses align closely with their religious beliefs.

    Am I going to sue a butcher because he won't serve a vegetarian like me? Are we going to legislate a requirement to participate in the Pledge of Allegiance, knowing that it is against the religious beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses to do so?

    I'm just going to call it like it is... there is an unfair bias against the free practice of religion in the quest to grant more full civil rights to LGBT persons; and I admit, they have been treated very unfairly in the past. I want all people to be treated fairly, but the government has no business telling me how to practice my religion by separating my beliefs from my business practices. In fact, I expect the government to protect my right to exercise my conscience as I see fit, just as LGBT persons expect the government to protect them from discrimination.
  • Reply 86 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DarkLite View Post

     

    When someone claims that all scripture is God-given and immaculate, ignoring the fact that there are countless different translations of the Bible and even different versions of the original manuscripts, it becomes impossible to have any sort of rational argument. 


     

    Satan and his ministers have been twisting the word of God ever since the garden in Eden. They are still doing it today. It is passed off as the word of God, but things have been removed, added, and changed for the purpose of deception.

     

    Just because perversions of God's word exist and abound doesn't mean that his true word doesn't exist.

  • Reply 87 of 294

    The King James version is an interpretation/perversion as well. 

    Not that I'm a biblical scholar or anything, but I think the "word of God" and the teachings of Jesus occurred before 1611 AD.

     

    Heck who knows maybe the real Bible was something else entirely and the Samsung of the day totally remade it into what we perceive now.

    1000 years from now history may tell us that Android supplanted Blackberry and iOS was a minor sect banished to the wilderness.

  • Reply 88 of 294
    Who issues business licenses then? And laws on non-discrimination don't apply to private business owners?
    Great points! As a firm believer in liberty, I don't believe that any business owner should be forced to change their business practices to suit the whims of others. None of us is entitled to the good, services, or labors of others. A private business is different than the government (only one place to get a driver's license, etc.).
  • Reply 89 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TBell View Post

     

     

     

    It says homosexual perverts, homosexual in this context is "clearly" an adjective and modifies the noun perverts. So, essentially if you believed in this type of thing, I would read what you provided to mean that perverts who are homosexuals shall not possess God's Kingdom. This says nothing to homosexuals who are not perverts. So, the passage you quote is not very clear to me. If the passage meant all homosexuals, it would just use homosexuals as a noun and leave off perverts altogether. 




    I'm on your side now (agnostic, pro-gay rights), but it's pretty clear what the Bible says about homosexuality. So, for those who take it as the "inerrant Word of God", and try to interpret it logically (ironic, I know), it clearly says it is sinful. Some may use it to justify their pre-existing hate and prejudice, but for others its just an objective statement that comes along with the all-inclusive Christianity package. To convince them otherwise will require dealing with many much more complicated issues, which essentially amounts to their entire world view. And we obviously aren't going to be able to begin to address that here.

  • Reply 90 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    I guess you forgot this little bit of scripture.



    No. I'm aware of that portion of scripture. Those verses don't cancel out the rest of scripture, however.

     

    The verses you referenced are teaching a lesson to us that we should not think someone else's sin is greater than our own.  Our Lord was speaking to the scribes and Pharisees there, and they were neglecting portions of the law, applying the parts they liked, and adding things that were never there. The lesson is to not be a hypocrite. God can tell if I'm a hypocrite by looking at my heart and by seeing my actions daily, and men can tell I'm a hypocrite only by my actions. Since no one on here presumably knows me in person and the way I live on a daily basis, then no one here can apply this scripture to me. Likewise, I cannot apply it to you. This lesson is an internal one for us to take to our heart, not to throw into the face of another person when they are speaking the truth of God's word.



    These scriptures are a favorite among Christians and non-Christians alike today, because it's an easy way of ignoring sin and sweeping it under a rug. It seems that in the eyes of many, the only sin is to speak against sin. They will immediately pull out one of these two versions. But that's not the lesson of scripture as a whole. Forgiveness is to be balanced with things like exhorting, rebuking, repentance, etc. God's holy word speaks of these other concepts, too.

     

    Yes, we are to forgive. I forgive homosexuals just like I forgive murderers. I need their forgiveness, too. We all need forgiveness. But after forgiveness comes an exhortation to godly living. We are to encourage one another toward that.

     

    "And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works..." (Hebrews 10:24)

  • Reply 91 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

     

    What a stupid and biased headline/article.   I'm not sure I support such a bill, but it's not a bill that "legalizes discrimination."  Under existing Arizona law, gays are not a protected class.  It's already legal to refuse service on those grounds.  This bill simply clarifies that businesses are free to claim religious expression as a reason for refusing service.    This is a result of cases around the country where some businesses are being forced to serve gay customers, arguing that doing so violates their 1st Amendment rights.   The best example I can think of is the Christian baker who refused to make a gay couple's wedding cake, and was sued (the business lost in district court, I believe...and is appealing).   

     

    As for me, I don't know.  Personally, I don't think people should be discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.  However, I think there are exceptions.  I don't think I want the government forcing a Christian business to do something/support something that directly violates its religious liberties.  If we can do that, why can we not force churches to marry gay couples?  After all, they are non-profits and "get" tax benefits, right?   


     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by randallking View Post



    AppleInsider, I would have preferred that you speak with a less biased voice in your writing. Please just report the facts instead of taking sides.



    That said, I stand with the Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Word of God, who calls homosexuality an abomination in his holy scriptures.



    Nevertheless, I expect a news site to report facts and not lace it with personal feelings, either toward the side I hold or to the other.



    The law cannot stand.   Using the new law one could 'legally' discriminate against black people, Muslims, Jews and basically anyone they wanted.  The Governor would be crazy to sign this law.  This law forces the government to become the arbiter of religious values as well, quite a gray area and a huge waste of time and effort.    Are courts to judge what is a valid 'deep seated' belief? 

     

    The only cool thing about this law is seeing what great things Pastafarians will do with it. 

  • Reply 92 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RedRaider2011 View Post





    Funny how liberals use hate speech when someone doesn't agree with their side. They expect tolerance but will not allow another sides point of view. Nothing more hateful and intolerant than a liberal with an agenda.

    Liberals will always allow another sides point of view (please...don't distort the point with another "smoke and mirrors" tactic which is quite typical amongst conservatives) - but when it comes to discrimination (hidden behind "religion") - damn right we're going to speak out AND will continue to put people in office that will protect the rights of EVERY citizen.  We're not going away (unlike the complete dysfunctional Republican party - they are quite hysterical of late).  PS..we don't "expect" tolerance, we'll DEMAND it until every citizen is treated equally. 

  • Reply 93 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DiegoG View Post



    Who issues business licenses then? And laws on non-discrimination don't apply to private business owners?

     

    I don't think we should have business licenses (for most things; I can't say for sure about all things; haven't considered it that carefully).

     

    No, I don't think we should have non-discrimination laws for private business owners, corporations, etc. The government should not discriminate, because as I alluded to before, they are a monopoly that there is no way around. For private business owners, they should be able to run their business however they choose. If they do something that you disagree with, you can boycott them, and I can do the same.

  • Reply 94 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post

     



    I couldn't agree with you more, discrimination based on sexual orientation is the worst example of bigotry and hatred.


     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ItsTheInternet View Post

     



    I couldn't agree with you more, discrimination based on sexual orientation is the worst example of bigotry and hatred.


     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    I guess you forgot this little bit of scripture.

     

    THEREFORE, we should hate people who believe in God and show bigotry against them.

    I regret the day our forefathers settled in North America for whatever reason they left the Old World.

  • Reply 95 of 294
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    mobius wrote:
    I can't believe people such as you still exist in the 21st century. You do realise how ridiculous you sound don't you?

    The bible is so outdated

    I take exception to a couple of things here Mobius. The bible is extremely relevant. Love your neighbor as yourself and the entire example set by Jesus is one to be revered- whether you are a Christian or not.

    Secondly- how is your intolerance to Christians any different than intolerance to homosexuals? Intolerance is intolerance as far as I'm concerned.

    The problem is people like rand who come on a forum thinking they can change the mind of a non believer. And then quotig scripture- as if that means ANYTHING to a non believer. They're just words. It was written so believers would understand it and non believers wouldn't. It is so annoying as a Christian to see these types of people because they give us a bad name. Rand needs to spend less time here convincing no one- and more time being friends with homosexuals and listening to them. Then he'd be a better Christian.

    Bottom line- he doesn't speak for me.
  • Reply 96 of 294
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    rogifan wrote: »
    Can someone explain exactly what this bill is and why it's being opposed? If I'm a vegetarian who is morally opposed to killing animals for food and I own a restaurant does Apple think I should be forced to serve meat since not doing so would be discriminating against meat eaters? If I own a photography studio and do weddings but am morally opposed to gay marriage should I be forced to photograph gay weddings even if it goes against my beliefs because not doing do would be discriminating against gays? Even if there are 100 other photography studios that would have no problem at all doing gay weddings? I'm just trying to understand what PC bandwagon Apple is jumping on here.

    Your problem is that you have classed this under "PC bandwagon." It is not an issue of political correctness, it is a matter of practcal business concern for Apple.

    They're investing half a billion in new manufacturing there, they will have people working there, they want a welcoming living "climate" there like they have in California. The law would make any business wishing to locate in Arizona at that scale complicit. They may also have ongoing larger plans for Arizona.
  • Reply 97 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    Where sin abounds, grace abounds much more.



    I love that verse! It shows the triumph of our Savior over death. Thank you for posting it.

     

    Here is the whole sentence:

     

    "But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 5:20-21)

     

    I think in the context, it's speaking of how sin abounded because of its effect in passing death upon all men since Adam (Rom 5:17-19), but grace abounded much more in its ability through our Lord Jesus Christ of redeeming his elect from that state of death.

     

    "Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever." (Rev 5:13)

     

    Amen!

  • Reply 98 of 294
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    wardc wrote: »
    To those having any question whatsoever on the biblical perspective on this, read 1 Corinthians, namely chapter 6 verses 9-11: "Surely you know that the wicked will not possess God's Kingdom. Do not fool yourselves; people who are immoral or who worship idols or are adulterers or homosexual perverts or who steal or who are overly greedy or are drunkards or who slander others or who are thieves — none of these will possess God's Kingdom. Some of you were like that. But you have been purified from sin; you have been dedicated to God; you have been put right with God by the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

    It is clear what the Bible has to say about homosexuality. It is ungodly, and it is a sin, and homosexuals are going against God's plan, command, and nature and doing an abominable act which walks against Christ, not with Christ.

    The good news of this, is that there is hope, and communion with God and salvation is not completely lost. By turning away from sinful acts and living in accordance with God's law, one may be right with Christ and come to share in the heavenly Kingdom.

    Stop it! Save bible verses for your bible study- or a Christian forum.

    You're not doing any good here- you're just further creating stereotypes. I don't talk with scriptures to non believers just as I don't want them bringing them up to me. You're on two different levels.
  • Reply 99 of 294
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by randallking View Post

     



    Just to be clear, I believe the first one is the word of God and the others are perversions of God's word.


     

    Hmm. 

     

  • Reply 100 of 294

    No. I'm aware of that portion of scripture. Those verses don't cancel out the rest of scripture, however.

    The verses you referenced are teaching a lesson to us that we should not think someone else's sin is greater than our own.  Our Lord was speaking to the scribes and Pharisees there, and they were neglecting portions of the law, applying the parts they liked, and adding things that were never there. The lesson is to not be a hypocrite. God can tell if I'm a hypocrite by looking at my heart and by seeing my actions daily, and men can tell I'm a hypocrite only by my actions. Since no one on here presumably knows me in person and the way I live on a daily basis, then no one here can apply this scripture to me. Likewise, I cannot apply it to you. This lesson is an internal one for us to take to our heart, not to throw into the face of another person when they are speaking the truth of God's word.


    These scriptures are a favorite among Christians and non-Christians alike today, because it's an easy way of ignoring sin and sweeping it under a rug. It seems that in the eyes of many, the only sin is to speak against sin. They will immediately pull out one of these two versions. But that's not the lesson of scripture as a whole. Forgiveness is to be balanced with things like exhorting, rebuking, repentance, etc. God's holy word speaks of these other concepts, too.

    Yes, we are to forgive. I forgive homosexuals just like I forgive murderers. I need their forgiveness, too. We all need forgiveness. But after forgiveness comes an exhortation to godly living. We are to encourage one another toward that.

    "And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works..." (Hebrews 10:24)

    Nobody's sin is greater than yours or mine. Sins aren't weighted, there aren't ones that are better or worse than the others despite our worldly reasoning. We are not to judge anyone because we're just as sinful as they are.
Sign In or Register to comment.