Cook says discriminatory 'religious freedom' laws are dangerous, calls for action

1151618202126

Comments

  • Reply 341 of 512
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,183member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post





    I suppose minorities could say exactly the same thing regarding cops.

     

    What about minority cops?

  • Reply 342 of 512
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,183member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post





    Absolutely not. The opponents of this law are bigots. The vitriol against it is proof that it's needed.



    That's an unprovable negative assertion.

  • Reply 343 of 512
    bsenkabsenka Posts: 799member

    That's an unprovable negative assertion.

    This thread is proof enough.
  • Reply 344 of 512
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,183member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post





    This thread is proof enough.



    No it isn't.

  • Reply 345 of 512
    They shouldn't be. Any religious belief system that teaches that those who don't share your particular ideology are fair game for discriminatory treatment should be called out.

    This is the basis of all three Judeo-based religions.

    But I agree with you.

    Personally, I think anyone who actually believes in religion, especially Judiasm, Christianiry, or Islam, is an idiot or using it for power/control purposes.

    You're quite right.

    We're all fools, even Satanists and atheists, but especially we Christians.

    C'est last vie.
  • Reply 346 of 512
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nowayout11 View Post

     



    How many Islamic politicians are there in America trying to pander to an Islamic base for political gain? Derp.




    There is exactly one Muslim in Congress, out of 535 people.  And I've never heard him pander to anyone.

     

    Just answering your rhetorical question. :)

  • Reply 347 of 512
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bsenka View Post





    Absolutely not. The opponents of this law are bigots. The vitriol against it is proof that it's needed.



    I suggest you take the few scheckles you have and purchase yourself a dictionary.  Please.

  • Reply 348 of 512
    aaronj wrote: »
    nowayout11 wrote: »
     


    How many Islamic politicians are there in America trying to pander to an Islamic base for political gain? Derp.


    There is exactly one Muslim in Congress, out of 535 people.  And I've never heard him pander to anyone.

    Just answering your rhetorical question. :)

    He doesn't panda?

    So he's not exactly a Giant of a man. :lol:
  • Reply 349 of 512
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,980member
    Or condone it, which a wedding cake would do.

    I don't see how a cake condones anything, but I can see a baker having a problem with putting 2 men or women on it.
  • Reply 350 of 512
    bsenkabsenka Posts: 799member

    No it isn't.

    It absolutely is. There is a galling level of intolerance being displayed by many of the vocal opponents of this bill.
  • Reply 351 of 512
    bsenkabsenka Posts: 799member
    aaronj wrote: »

    I suggest you take the few scheckles you have and purchase yourself a dictionary.  Please.

    I'm well aware of what the words mean. Opponents of this bill are bigots.
  • Reply 352 of 512
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Or condone it, which a wedding cake would do.

    I don't see how a cake condones anything, but I can see a baker having a problem with putting 2 men or women on it.

    A wedding cake would condone sodomy.
  • Reply 353 of 512
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,705member
    This is the basis of all three Judeo-based religions.

    But I agree with you.

    Personally, I think anyone who actually believes in religion, especially Judiasm, Christianiry, or Islam, is an idiot or using it for power/control purposes.

    And people who degrade religion are complete jackasses because they rather not deal with it or are criminals.

    I guess generalizations work both ways.
  • Reply 354 of 512
    Or condone it, which a wedding cake would do.

    Really?!?

    Does that mean that Apple endorses every stupid homophobic comment posted by someone using their products?
    Does a gun manufacturer endorse every crime committed using its product?
  • Reply 355 of 512
    ned bulous wrote: »
    Or condone it, which a wedding cake would do.

    Really?!?

    Does that mean that Apple endorses every stupid homophobic comment posted by someone using their products?
    Does a gun manufacturer endorse every crime committed using its product?

    No, because they're not related.

    A wedding cake is symbolic of a union which is morally significant. If a homosexually-practicing sinner were to buy a Christmas cake, that would be fine.
  • Reply 356 of 512
    No, because they're not related.

    A wedding cake is symbolic of a union which is morally significant. If a homosexually-practicing sinner were to buy a Christmas cake, that would be fine.

    If a divorced and remarried abomination of a sinner wanted a wedding cake, would the baker also be condoning this immoral marriage?

    If a Christian bakes a Bar/Bat Mitzvah cake, is the baker denying Jesus?

    What about abusive relationships? If someone beats their spouse, the baker who made their cake somehow condoned it?

    I guess I never realized the gravity of the baking profession and how he or she needs to research the quality of a relationship before condoning the marriage. I hope all bakers are doing their due diligence and working with therapists, when required, before they condone any marriage.
  • Reply 357 of 512
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    This thread, like the other one from yesterday, makes a strong case for the benefits of my blocking tool. You can get it here!

     

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/185450/apples-tim-cook-plans-to-give-away-all-of-his-money/40#post_2699793

     

    Then make some suggestions for a name for it. 

     

    'Ass Blocker' was my first choice.

  • Reply 358 of 512
    sddavesddave Posts: 24member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    He's the CEO.  

     

    He can do whatever the Hell he wants.  If the shareholders hate it then they need to speak out and have the BOD vote him out.

     

    Till then take it like a man or sell your stock.




    And did you similarly support the right of the Chick-Fil-A CEO to express his opinion that "marriage" should only be between a man and a woman?

  • Reply 359 of 512
    atlappleatlapple Posts: 496member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    This thread, like the other one from yesterday, makes a strong case for the benefits of my blocking tool. You can get it here!

     

    http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/185450/apples-tim-cook-plans-to-give-away-all-of-his-money/40#post_2699793

     

    Then make some suggestions for a name for it. 

     

    'Ass Blocker' was my first choice.




    It also makes a strong case we shouldn't have threads like this on AI. Or if AI wants to report on it don't make the thread available for comments. If I blocked everyone I disagreed with I would nave 50% on block. These threads become pointless after about 10 posts. 

  • Reply 360 of 512
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,980member
    A wedding cake would condone sodomy.

    And heterosexuals don't ever practice sodomy? Lesbians don't normally practice it, and 2 gay men don't necessarily have to.
Sign In or Register to comment.