I don't get what's so hard to understand about that....
Let's not be so quick to judge. Perhaps he has a better understanding than you give him credit for. This is not D-Day. He's not going to fight his battles on all fronts at the same time. Maneuvering in a politically charge arena requires a bit of tack. Some things are not always apparent or easily understood by irrational fanatics who think in absolutes.
Let's not be so quick to judge. Perhaps he has a better understanding than you give him credit for. This not D-Day. He's not going to fight his battles on all fronts at the same time. Maneuvering in a politically charge arena requires a bit of tack. Some things are not always apparent or easily understood by irrational fanatics who think in absolutes.
True, you must always have tact, I'm a fan of that. But there's a difference between having tact and making a choice not to say anything. I believe Tim falls in the latter and I'd be surprised to hear him speak on these same issues in other countries where they do business. But either way, it's Friday and i'm about to veg and think more about which Apple Watch i'm going to buy next week. Have a good day.
Well your logical fallacy proves no point. Everyone on the planet doesn't know how Tim Cook feels about what's going on in other countries. Furthermore if everyone knew how Tim Cook feels then there would be no reason for Tim to say anything even in the US, no? Just because he claims he feels a certain way about these issues here, it has no bearing on how he truly feels about it in other places that Apple does business. I look at actions instead of making assumptions, and Tim's actions with other countries in this regard do not show that he holds that same sentiment. Period.
So really everything you just said is one big assumption at best.
That's neither here nor there for a few reasons:
I'm not advocating for gay rights, Tim is.
He claims that Apple excepts all walks of life, while he has no problem making money in a country which has a philosophy that goes completely against what he said Apple is about. At the same time he has no problem criticizing it in the US where he will face no adversity or loss. It's hypocritical, either way you slice you. Period.
And again, if "everybody," whoever "everybody" is, knows where Tim stands then Tim himself wouldn't feel the need to say anything at all, even when it comes to the US. You're making the mistake of thinking that the magnitude of the potential consequences makes his stance non-hypocritical, but they don't. It's hypocritical whether you like it or not.
You can't say "oh well the consequences would be too big, so he's not a hypocrite..." Think about it, the only time people engage in hypocrisy is when the terms aren't favorable for them personally. People don't usually not practice what they preach when it's favorable to do so....If i'm wrong, then at what other times are people hypocrites than in the face of personally losing something that they deem valuable to keep a hold of or to gain???
He left the choice up to the people that disagreed with him. Not even close to the same. As far as all the time comment...when were the other times?
freediverx wrote: »
Right, because the ultimate guide to morality is a book in which slavery, polygamy, rape, and infanticide are A-OK, but oral sex and eating shellfish are frowned upon.
Having said that, I do think Fiorina should follow the teachings of
1 Corinthians 14:34.
jbdragon wrote: »
All all for stopping giving all these country's money!!! Why are we? We're borrowing from China and others and then giving money to China and everyone else. We're 18 trillion in Debt. Who does this. I also think we should just pull all our bases out of all these country's including Europe. It's basically a America invasion around the world. it's not like we Have a French Army base in Alabama, and a UK Army base in Nebraska, etc. Many of these places don't want us anyway. Of course if we pulled out, all that American money goes away and would really hurt them. The again, we hurt our own country with all the base closures. We can't even protect our own boarders.
Pull out, let them go on killing each other. it's not like we could ever stop it. They've been at it for thousands of years. How about we stop being the world police.
Carly is just a wee bit desperate for attention for her guaranteed to fail bid for the presidential nomination.
freediverx wrote: »
Ok, while we're on that topic, why are churches tax exempt? Why am I forced to subsidize religious groups with my tax dollars?
And why is it that some Christians choose to ignore the core teachings of Christ (unconditional love, acceptance, forgiveness, not judging others), while obsessing on some carefully selected verses from the Old Testament to justify their hate and persecution of others?
"Do to others whatever you would have them do to you." (Matt 7:12; par. Luke 6:31)
"Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you." (Luke 6:27-28; par. Matt 5:43-48)
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">"Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you." </span>
(Matt 7:1-2; par. Luke 6:37)
<img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="57407" data-type="61" src="http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/57407/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 128px">
techmanmike wrote: »
That's my point. again....speaking up for a cause only when the conditions are favorable for you is not courage, and it is hypocritical to do so only when you won't face any kind of harm. There's no way around that, regardless of what the consequences are.
Secondly, you can't just take out one scripture and leave out the rest. Per the bible you <span style="line-height:22.399999618530273px;">are </span>
supposed to submit to governing bodies, but not once does it say that those governing bodies supersede God. You are to submit <span style="line-height:22.399999618530273px;">as long as </span>
the governing body isn't causing you to do things that are against God's own law. If you want proof, read the whole entire book of Daniel. God allowed the Jews to be taken into captivity by the Babylonians for disobedience to him. In Babylon Daniel and the 3 others submitted humbly to Nebuchadnezzer and served him well, but resisted worshipping him and his image as the rest of the Babylonians did, because of their devotion to God. When Nebuchadnezzer ordered Daniel and the others to be thrown in the furnace because they went against <span style="line-height:22.399999618530273px;">his law to worship his image,</span>
God saved them out of the furnace because of their faithfulness to <span style="line-height:22.399999618530273px;">him.</span>
I never try to bet preachy on AI, but you must understand that scripture has to be understood in the proper context. God did gave the jews into the hands of the Babylonians, but not so that the Babylonians could become their God. This story also shows that Daniel and the others were willing to forfeit their lives for their cause, that's how much it meant to them.
So how do you reconcile the Constitution (which specifically forbids the establishment of religion of religious favoritism) with your claim? Are you equating this issue with the persecution endured by those who came to America in the 16th and 17th centuries? Are you claiming the people wanting these laws are being persecuted and being prevented from practicing their religion in their homes or houses of worship?
It's also funny how people forget the "nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof" clause of that Amendment.
Check and mate.
Actually, we are a Christian nation. That doesn't mean other religions aren't welcome, nor does it mean you have to be religious. But the people who came over here wanted religious freedom, the founding documents are filled with references to a Creator...I mean, I can go on here...
Some of the people were Christians, some were other types of thiests, some were athiests. But we definitely are not a Christian nation. We've got a lot of Christians (I'm one) but that doesn't define us. We also, incidentally, have a lot of Christians who believe that the bans on homosexuality are in the same category as the laws on diet, clothing, and limiting the rights of women - a combination of things that only applied to a small tribe wandering through the wilderness and men putting their words in the Lord's mouth.
And again, if you want to meet in your churches and say "gays are evil, marks of the devil, and really really icky" that's your right. But if you exercise the bits of the bible demanding you stone all gay people, you're going to get arrested. And if you discriminate against them, that should not be allowed either.
No religion should receive tax breaks. Comparing public assistance and social programs to being tax exempt based of religion is a pathetic reach.
You should stop posting here. You are making a fool of yourself with your incoherent and illogical posts. Of course, being a fool is probably a way of life for you, given your belief in crazy Christian myths.
...Actually, we are a Christian nation. That doesn't mean other religions aren't welcome, nor does it mean you have to be religious. But the people who came over here wanted religious freedom, the founding documents are filled with references to a Creator...I mean, I can go on here...
The so-called "founding fathers" were a bit more complex in their beliefs:
Then, you have to consider that the "first Americans" ranged from the American Indians, to early Vikings who left clues to their settlements, to invading armies from a variety of countries at different times.
I accept the perception that America is majority Christian (and the numbers support the dominance of such a belief), but I don't believe in organized religions, nor do I believe that the majority of people completely adhere to their religions except when it suits them. And I absolutely believe that there needs to be a "bright line" separating religion from our government or we end up being identical to England, or worse... the Taliban.
robbyx wrote: »
Newsflash. We're NOT a Christian nation, no matter how much you theocrats wish otherwise. You object to equal rights for gay people because your magic manual from the sky wizard tells you to. If we lived in sky wizard land, that might hold weight. But we don't live in sky wizard land. We live in the United States, where church and state are wisely separated.
What makes you think that you deserve special treatment? You want to live your life according to a book of mythology and the rest of society is supposed to bend over backwards and accommodate you? Gay people aren't the ones seeking special rights. It's whiny Christians who seem to confuse the USA with some medieval Christian state.
No one should receive special treatment. Married couples should demand to be treated the same as gays, or single people for that matter, and have their government sponsored tax perks removed. Abso-damn-lutely. I strongly object to all social engineering by government. Providing large voting blocs with economic benefits and incentives is unequal treatment and therefore unconstitutional.
"I want to go into a store and get served just like everyone else" is NOT special treatment. "I don't want some salesperson or some baker or some hotel clerk or some manager pass judgement on my life and say I can't be served" is NOT special treatment.
How in the world did she ever get that job in the first place ???
She almost destroyed H-P!