'I'm proud to be gay,' Apple CEO Tim Cook says in open letter supporting equality

1222325272833

Comments

  • Reply 481 of 650
    smalmsmalm Posts: 675member

    "I'm proud to be gay"



    Why is he proud of that?

    Is he also proud of still having hairs on his head and not being bald?

    It is just the way he is and that's it.

    It's neither something to be proud of nor something to be ashamed of.

     

    my 2¢

  • Reply 482 of 650
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    You may be right, but I don't think it is that simple. I think that in most cases, people develop homosexual tendencies through traumatic events in early life. And people also simply choose to lean that way; hence, bisexual people.




    People are extremely complex, thinking organisms, so I can't simply dismiss any theory out of hand without proof. It should be noted that the drive to reproduce is one of the strongest in the human species (along with other survival traits) because natural selection has made it this way. Behaviors that are not genetic and do not kill the organism may develop simply because survival is not threatened by their existence. If natural selection actually determined the existence of "gay" humans, then they would've all "died off" because they do not reproduce, which is why I believe there is a recurring genetic event that randomly, or via environmental factors affects development. Thus, it's genetics and it's random.


     

     

    In my opinion, that hypothesis doesn't make things any clearer, as you can then argue things both ways. To my mind, it’s far too simple and easy to say that it’s all down to genes, particularly when you look at the history of how genes are passed though generations. And we're awfully ignorant on genes today.

  • Reply 483 of 650
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    In my opinion, that hypothesis doesn't make things any clearer, as you can then argue things both ways. To my mind, it’s far too simple and easy to say that it’s all down to genes, particularly when you look at the history of how genes are passed though generations. And we're awfully ignorant on genes today.




    Speak for yourself, matey.

  • Reply 484 of 650
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member

    My rates just went up another 10%. For me, the 'health care tax' has been nothing but bad.

    Maybe we should have taken the insurance companies out of the picture.
  • Reply 485 of 650
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ibeam View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

     

     

     

    You may be right, but I don't think it is that simple. I think that in most cases, people develop homosexual tendencies through traumatic events in early life. And people also simply choose to lean that way; hence, bisexual people.


    Human emotions are complex. You cannot simplify them to some predictable social formula.


     

     

    I agree. That's what I was trying to say, but perhaps I was implying the opposite.

  • Reply 486 of 650
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member

    In my opinion, that hypothesis doesn't make things any clearer, as you can then argue things both ways. To my mind, it’s far too simple and easy to say that it’s all down to genes, particularly when you look at the history of how genes are passed though generations. And we're awfully ignorant on genes today.

    Maybe in a seminary. You'd be amazed at the work being done at the top genome research centers around the world today.

    At a very simple level, it's perhaps worth pointing out that in the animal world sex can be changed on demand in some species by chemical changes as needs demand.

    Oh and yes we are animals.
  • Reply 487 of 650
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by smalM View Post

     

    "I'm proud to be gay"



    Why is he proud of that?

    Is he also proud of still having hairs on his head and not being bald?

    It is just the way he is and that's it.

    It's neither something to be proud of nor something to be ashamed of.

     

    my 2¢


     

    Culture has dictated that being gay is shameful. People haven't been systemically harassed, beaten, murdered and compared to murderers and pedophiles for being straight or bald. People aren't fired from their jobs, kept out of their loved one's hospital room, or denied survivor benefits for being straight.  Taking pride in who you are in spite of a lifetime of a-holes throwing you under the bus is commendable. That's what the "pride" thing is about. Cook individually ended up having a blessed life, but him speaking out helps the 99.99% who don't have it as good as he does.

  • Reply 488 of 650
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Maybe we should have taken the insurance companies out of the picture.



    I'm of the opinion that we need to get interfering government out of the picture and let free market competition work for people. It works in nearly every other facet of our lives, why shouldn't it be working in health care? The profit motive and full-bore competition working on the various problems would be solved if regulations were chopped away.

     

    One tiny example, look at what Walmart is doing today. They've opened up 'quick clinics' for their customers because they see a need and they have a solution. Giving people options at ALL kinds of price levels would eliminate state and Federal involvement entirely. But that isn't what has happened. What has happened is government intervention has warped the true costs of things, creating economic and marketplace imbalances. Why? Because government growth and "survival" are dependent on their intervention and manipulation of businesses and markets. They control the taxes. They create regulations. They write new laws which give them greater and greater power. These simple facts are obscured by the consensual delusion that government is doing good for Americans by giving people things that are demanded, rather than allowing the balance achieved by customers making buying choices determine which providers survive.

  • Reply 489 of 650
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    Your quote doesn't say he's a homosexual.

     

    You do realize that the quote came from his coming out article, right?  The very next sentence he writes is, "Plenty of colleagues at Apple know I’m gay, and it doesn’t seem to make a difference in the way they treat me."

     

    You're not still in denial about Tim Cook being gay are you?  Accept it and move on.

  • Reply 490 of 650
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    droidftw wrote: »
    You do realize that the quote came from his coming out article, right?  You're not still in denial about Tim Cook being gay are you?

    Where did you get that from? Have you read this thread from start to finish? Soli is not in denial at all!
  • Reply 491 of 650
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member

    I'm of the opinion that we need to get interfering government out of the picture and let free market competition work for people. It works in nearly every other facet of our lives, why shouldn't it be working in health care? The profit motive and full-bore competition working on the various problems would be solved if regulations were chopped away.

    One tiny example, look at what Walmart is doing today. They've opened up 'quick clinics' for their customers because they see a need and they have a solution. Giving people options at ALL kinds of price levels would eliminate state and Federal involvement entirely. But that isn't what has happened. What has happened is government intervention has warped the true costs of things, creating economic and marketplace imbalances. Why? Because government growth and "survival" are dependent on their intervention and manipulation of businesses and markets. They control the taxes. They create regulations. They write new laws which give them greater and greater power. These simple facts are obscured by the consensual delusion that government is doing good for Americans by giving people things that are demanded, rather than allowing the balance achieved by customers making buying choices determining which providers survive.

    Wow we do wander OT in this thread! :)

    As a life long entrepreneur I am not disagreeing in principle but I was a victim of unregulated free market health insurance. After a decade of no claims and paying as a private individual for a very good and policy (so not exactly cheap but manageable), I was dropped after a serious operation. Excuse me, they did go out of their way to point out I wasn't 'dropped' rather 'not renewed'. So here I was, no insurance out of the blue and a pre existing condition in my 40's. This left me from 2001 to 2013 paying an astronomically high price for minimal coverage and half of by body 'excluded anyway'. Not until 2014 was I able to go out and even talk to a major carrier like BCBS who had previously refused to talk to me, and buy a good policy again.

    This experience made me aware of the plight of many who had had good insurance only to develop cancer for example and get capped and face literally death or bankruptcy and this in the riches country on earth. It wasn't a defensible set up by any moral standard I know of.

    So you can probably see why I have the opinion I have regarding some rules for insurance companies being a good idea. BTW I also believe everyone should have to pay even if according to their means, no free loading in the Emergency Room at everyone else's expense.

    Then don't get me started about the fact that a new joint in the USA (I mean the actual parts) cost multiple times the cost of the exact same part in say Belgium. So I also see that our insurance companies are being fleeced. There is a lot of blame to go around.
  • Reply 492 of 650
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    Maybe we should have taken the insurance companies out of the picture.


    I'm of the opinion that we need to get interfering government out of the picture and let free market competition work for people. It works in nearly every other facet of our lives, why shouldn't it be working in health care? The profit motive and full-bore competition working on the various problems would be solved if regulations were chopped away.

    One tiny example, look at what Walmart is doing today. They've opened up 'quick clinics' for their customers because they see a need and they have a solution. Giving people options at ALL kinds of price levels would eliminate state and Federal involvement entirely. But that isn't what has happened. What has happened is government intervention has warped the true costs of things, creating economic and marketplace imbalances. Why? Because government growth and "survival" are dependent on their intervention and manipulation of businesses and markets. They control the taxes. They create regulations. They write new laws which give them greater and greater power. These simple facts are obscured by the consensual delusion that government is doing good for Americans by giving people things that are demanded, rather than allowing the balance achieved by customers with choices determining which providers survive.

    Free markets work well for many aspects of the economy, but have a nearly fatal flaw for healthcare insurance in the absence of regulatory intervention. The insurance business, in general, works by charging according to risk, and if one is seeking insurance cover for situations arising from personal choice (expensive property, high-risk activities etc.), then it is not unreasonable to expect to pay high premiums. Applied to healthcare, however, that unfortunately penalizes those with the highest health risks, who are often also least able to pay the resulting high premiums - if they can even get cover.

    So, unless one regards access to healthcare as a privilege of the healthy and/or wealthy, then society has a dilemma - to intervene or not.

    The Walmart initiative is a good example of how to make healthcare services more competitive (also sorely needed), but does not directly help ensure that everyone can afford those services.
  • Reply 493 of 650
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    muppetry wrote: »
    Free markets work well for many aspects of the economy, but have a nearly fatal flaw for healthcare insurance in the absence of regulatory intervention. The insurance business, in general, works by charging according to risk, and if one is seeking insurance cover for situations arising from personal choice (expensive property, high-risk activities etc.), then it is not unreasonable to expect to pay high premiums. Applied to healthcare, however, that unfortunately penalizes those with the highest health risks, who are often also least able to pay the resulting high premiums - if they can even get cover.

    So, unless one regards access to healthcare as a privilege of the healthy and/or wealthy, then society has a dilemma - to intervene or not.

    The Walmart initiative is a good example of how to make healthcare services more competitive (also sorely needed), but does not directly help ensure that everyone can afford those services.

    You said it far better than I did.
  • Reply 494 of 650
    ibeamibeam Posts: 322member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by muppetry View Post



    So, unless one regards access to healthcare as a privilege of the healthy and/or wealthy, then society has a dilemma - to intervene or not.

     

    It is impossible to be a Libertarian unless you think you can personally handle anything that life can throw your way.

  • Reply 495 of 650
    droidftwdroidftw Posts: 1,009member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Where did you get that from? Have you read this thread from start to finish? Soli is not in denial at all!

     

    Thanks for speaking for Soli, I know how he gets shy about sharing his opinions.  ;)

     

    The post that he made left his denial status up in the air.  In the past he's been very passionate that because he didn't have documented proof that this somehow that meant that no one here could possibly no for sure whether Tim Cook was gay and that it was all speculation. 

     

    Maybe he was just trolling when he said Tim's statement didn't necessarily mean that he was gay?  As you appear to be Soli's spokesperson I'm sure you'd be happy to answer for him.

  • Reply 496 of 650
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    ibeam wrote: »
    It is impossible to be a Libertarian unless you think you can personally handle anything that life can throw your way.

    Very true, even though some of their ideas are appealing. It is all a pretty tough balancing act.
  • Reply 497 of 650
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,505member
    droidftw wrote: »
    Thanks for speaking for Soli, I know how he gets shy about sharing his opinions.  ;)

    The post that he made left his denial status up in the air.  In the past he's been very passionate that because he didn't have documented proof that somehow that meant that no one here could possibly no for sure whether Tim Cook was gay and that it was all speculation. 

    Maybe he was just trolling when he said Tim's statement didn't mean that he was gay?  As you appear to be Soli's spokesperson I'm sure you'd be happy to answer for him.

    I can't speak for anyone but myself as i was when i commented, hence suggesting you read the entire thread. It seemed pretty self evident that Soli was speaking positively on all fronts about Tim's statement to me. I can't obviously know how you interpret what he said, especially if you are reading through previously tinted glasses from other discussions.

    I can say I have never known any incarnation of Soli's AI memberships to troll. Take the Mickey yes ... troll no.
  • Reply 498 of 650
    christophbchristophb Posts: 1,482member
    Well I don't know about the President's care (since a single payer system was nixed) but the insurance companies are raising rates by an average of 21% in a few weeks I have been told. Remember there is no care from anywhere but insurance companies as always, they just can't drop you, refuse you or cap you now (that's the change in 2014). They can raise the rates as they see fit it would seem.

    Well in 2014 you weren't forced to buy their product. 2015, resistance is futile. The fun test will be April 15, 2015 when those refunds people count on are absorbed to cover penalty or subsidy that didn't happen.

    Single payer? Yes, let's put that in the hands of the same morons (sic. criminals) that steal from SS and Medicare surplus, run up $17.5 Trillion in debt, control insurance company rates, and let's not forget outsourcing the printing of infinite currency.

    I used to be single payer because I was the payer direct to the professional that provided care. Now the law directs I pay at the point of a gun.
  • Reply 499 of 650
    idreyidrey Posts: 647member
    smalm wrote: »
    "I'm proud to be gay"

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Why is he proud of that?</span>

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Is he also proud of still having hairs on his head and not being bald?</span>

    It is just the way he is and that's it.
    It's neither something to be proud of nor something to be ashamed of.

    my 2¢

    You cant just come out and say "i'm gay" is too plain. You have to make it clear and send the strong message, "proud to be gay" sounds like saying "i'm gay mother bi.ches deal with it! I have dealt with my pain and i am at peace with my self and with does that care about me" i think thats why! Just my 2 cents
  • Reply 500 of 650
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    droidftw wrote: »
    You do realize that the quote came from his coming out article, right?  The very next sentence he writes is, "Plenty of colleagues at Apple know I’m gay, and it doesn’t seem to make a difference in the way they treat me."

    Then why didn't you quote the fucking text where he states he's gay? Why do you still now refuse to cite or at least link where the quotation can be found? Why didn't you cite this when I've asked for proof in the past?

    edit: You pulled that quote from the comments he just made. Where is the proof he made his sexual orientation public to the world years ago? Show the proof.
    You're not still in denial about Tim Cook being gay are you?  Accept it and move on.

    What do you think started this thread. Take your time and think about it carefully. :rolleyes:
Sign In or Register to comment.