It is a shame that articles like this bring out the bad side of humanity but it is good to see that even some posters that I generally disagree with I agree with.
I don't have a problem with people being gay - each to their own - but this fact together with Apple's willingness to make enormous profits from doing business/exploiting labour in countries with abysmal human rights records and deplorable labor standards—and to remain conveniently quiet about this—reeks of extreme hypocrisy. Where's your voice on these far more important issues, Tim? Where are the slick videos and Apple parades and public statements and marches?
Tim Cook hasn't remained quiet on working conditions in China. Quite the opposite. There's even a slick part of Apple's website dedicated to the subject.
You're going to have to find another stick to beat him with.
Now if only Apple would match for human rights where Christian pastors are separated from their families, placed in jail without trial, tortured, and terrorized simply for their beliefs in Muslim nations.
Or marching for freedom of speech (oh never mind. They have an issue with the confederate flag all of a sudden, but continue to sell music that encourages the murder of peace officers).
Not sure how marching in a gay parade equals inclusion. They've hired gay people already right, so they've included them. Didn't think they'd have to make the apple logo into a gayified version. That's going a bit far. Apple is a hardware/software conpany. Not a sexual orientation company.
So cook is gay. That's his personal choice. Doesn't mean he has to use the company as a vehicle to shove it down everyone's throat.
Why is it that every 'Apple is too gay' bod is obsessed with something being shoved down their throat?
And this is why America is doomed folks. The Supreme Court should not be legislating. Why do you think we have a legislative branch, which is Congress. The Supreme Court is not part of the Legislative Branch. It is the Judicial Branch.
They didn't legislate, they simply ruled that the 14th amendment applied to the situation. The 14th amendment was put in place by the legislative branch.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Seems pretty clear cut that LGBT people were being denied rights at the state level, SCOTUS simply enforced the 14th amendment. Unless you feel that the States should be able to supersede the constitution.
America was founded on belief in god just look on the dollar bill, it says in god we trust
belief in god has been deeply rooted in American society until the last century and a lot of people still believe
Under god wasn't added to the dollar bill until the 50s, due to the whole red threat/communism scare.
".. American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State"
While I won't argue that much of the constitution isn't based on traditional Judeo-Christian, our country was formed by those who were escaping religious prosecution. Pretty sure they wouldn't want one religions values forced upon all citizens.
Under god wasn't added to the dollar bill until the 50s, due to the whole red threat/communism scare.
".. American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State"
While I won't argue that much of the constitution isn't based on traditional Judeo-Christian, our country was formed by those who were escaping religious prosecution. Pretty sure they wouldn't want one religions values forced upon all citizens.
I have wondered for years why no one has challenged the use of the phrase "In God We Trust" on Federal Reserve Notes and U.S. Mint coins. Technically, the Federal Reserve isn't part of the U.S. government, it's privately owned, but there is no such excuse at the U.S. Mint. Surely "In God We Trust" on coins is both unconstitutional and for the religious, blasphemous.
UPDATE: Evidently there have been more legal challenges than I thought. I find the Supreme Court's rationale vacuous and unconvincing in the defense of the continued use of such a blatantly religious phrase. If it really has no religious import whatsoever, then it's discontinuance should be immediate. Mindless jingoism is no excuse for unconstitutionality, no matter how much the public supports it.
Quote:
"In God we trust" as a national motto and on U.S. currency has been the subject of numerous unsuccessful lawsuits.[30] The motto was first challenged in Aronow v. United States in 1970, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled: "It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency 'In God We Trust' has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion. Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemblance to a governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise."[31] The decision was cited in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, a 2004 case on the Pledge of Allegiance. These acts of "ceremonial deism" are "protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because they have lost through rote repetition any significant religious content."[32] In Zorach v. Clauson (1952), the Supreme Court also held that the nation's "institutions presuppose a Supreme Being" and that government recognition of God does not constitute the establishment of a state church as the Constitution's authors intended to prohibit.[33]
Aside from constitutional objections, President Theodore Roosevelt took issue with using the motto on coinage which he considered to be a sacrilege using God's name on money.[34]
I think the relative ease and safety of living in the US gives some folks waaay too much leisure time with little to worry about. So they look for petty issues to absorb their attention.
I would say there isn't really anything great or even good about Canada. You are a social experiment gone bad.
Ask anyone in the LGBT community or anyone who isn't white.
And socially, Canada is an example for the rest of the world. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. Probably from the very same ideology that is preoccupied with denying others the same basic rights *you* have on the basis of sexual orientation.
And to the fundies and assorted varieties of religious conservatives in this thread:
God made black holes, nebulae, stars that burn at 25,000 Kelvin, and the closet some of you are still clearly in. He doesn't care who your insignificant ass shags or marries.
Why isn't Tim Cook marching for his minority employees? His handicapped employees? Females? Suicidal Chinese factory employees who make Apple products and work long hours at a highly stressful job with low income???
If Cook were showing support for his religious employees - which statistically speaking, most likely outnumber his gay employees by a very large margin, that would not mean that he was against same-sex couples.
Ducking my question with childish sarcasm is not an answer, so I'll say it again: Why isn't Tim Cook out there marching for his employees with religious beliefs?
Are you marching for all those things? If you aren't why not?
Why isn't Tim Cook marching for his minority employees? His handicapped employees? Females? Suicidal Chinese factory employees who make Apple products and work long hours at a highly stressful job with low income???
If Cook were showing support for his religious employees - which statistically speaking, most likely outnumber his gay employees by a very large margin, that would not mean that he was against same-sex couples.
Ducking my question with childish sarcasm is not an answer, so I'll say it again: Why isn't Tim Cook out there marching for his employees with religious beliefs?
At the very least I guess it can be said because he has a shred of common sense. Religion is the cancer of the world, it was invented to control and enslave people, and goddamn does it still work brilliantly.
You would think in the modern world some people would be able to shake the cob webs out of their heads and say, "Holy shit...we've been following some insane falsehood invented by nearly illiterate medieval nobles for the purposes of controlling and brainwashing the population, and allowing the weak few to rule the many...I think we stop now,"
I think the relative ease and safety of living in the US gives some folks waaay too much leisure time with little to worry about. So they look for petty issues to absorb their attention.
On the other hand, it's unconstitutional. Strict adherence to and the consistent application of the laws based on the Constitution is the reason for the Federal government to exist in the first place. That there are so many overlooked and ignored constitutional violations by government that go unaddressed in this day and age is a sure sign that the Federal system has outlived its "sell by" date.
Religion isn't the problem. Buddhists never bothered anyone, and Zen Buddhism in particular is something a lot of folks should look into as a matter of course. Then again, these aren't deistic "religions."
The problem is how it is used.
Some folks have a very poor (and warped) relationship with religion.
Bullshit, sure he did. When he had issues with Flash and with DRM he wrote essays that were hosted on the Apple website. We all just agreed with them so no one batted an eye.
This has to do with the wellbeing of Cook’s employees across the country and is a new issue that wasn’t brought to a polling point when Jobs was around. He obviously had no issues with gay people since he handed his keys to the kingdom to a gay man. This is his flash/drm issue – the only difference is that it effects employees rather than code and codecs. And like the issue with Flash, you may or may not agree with it, but don’t pretend jobs did nothing like this.
Ducking my question with childish sarcasm is not an answer, so I'll say it again: Why isn't Tim Cook out there marching for his employees with religious beliefs?
By marching with LGBT he is, but apparently you're too blind to recognize it.
When the SCOTUS has to make a ruling and its a 5-4 vote with the Chief Justice actually reading his decent from the bench, it's not a new world. The LGBT community and Gay Marriage is no more accepted right now then it was before the ruling. If people were against it they are against it today. For some that may have been on the fence regarding the issue they are now most likely against it because in general the American population does not like having a court overturn the wishes of the people.
Also just because Federal law now says they can get married doesn't mean the states are just going to go along with it. Our Federal government tends to pick and choose what laws they want to enforce, state legalization of pot in Colorado is a perfect example. Colorado is violating Federal law, yet the government is doing nothing about it.
When all the parties and parades are over everyone is going to come to the conclusion nothing has really changed. A court can't make someone accept something they don't want or like. Having a court force something upon a state or the people of that state doesn't breed acceptance it will only breed more hate.
Also if anyone thinks that once SCOTUS makes a ruling nothing can be done or it will never change then I suggest you read something like the Dred Scott v. Sandford ruling in 1857, clearly that ruling isn't in effect. It's somewhat amazing to me that people think something that is so divisive it needs SCOTUS to rule on it that somehow means progressive change.
On a side note it would be nice is Tim Cook concentrated more on his job, since becoming CEO his rollouts of new hardware and software pretty much suck.
And for the longest time people felt the same way about removing racial segregation from our society – some still have issues with it. If we only rule with what the majority is willing to agree on only the status quo remains. Our history shows that the people en masse don’t always choose what is good for us as a whole but rather what is “easy” and what may not “rock the boat” on topics they are not on the “outs” on. When this no longer becomes a big deal, people will forget what the big issue is, just like racial integration, just like women’s right to vote, just like interracial marriage.
I know it’s not cut and dried – not everything the people are “technically for” (I use that really loosely) should be over turned – but that’s what the supreme court is for. To look at the constitution as written and contrast it with the society we want to be. Many states had amended their constitution to include wording not originally included or intended specifically to exclude people from a legal marriage. This ruling course-corrected that.
As far as Tim Cook goes, he’s been doing a great job and apple has reached new heights under his guidance. None of Apple’s products, both software or hardware, have been without issue and many duds had been created well before his tenure. You are just mad he’s doing this. That’s unfortunate but you are not his boss and you are free to purchase other products if you find these have too much “suck”.
Religion isn't the problem. Buddhists never bothered anyone, and Zen Buddhism in particular is something a lot of folks should look into as a matter of course. Then again, these aren't deistic "religions."
The problem is how it is used.
Some folks have a very poor (and warped) relationship with religion.
Well, I'd bend this excellent post a bit this way:
Buddhism and the many older "religions" throughout the world that revered the creative processes inherent in nature and the cosmos are, were nonauthoritarian, non heirarchal, often polyamorous and female-centered.
The patriarchal war god we know in our familiar Abrahamic religions is a creation of the Bronze Age. He first appeared in the authoritarian form we're still stuck with on the Central Asian steppe among Indo-European horse-riders. This god as alpha male with a inner fear of his own homoeroticism is the origin of militarism, fascism, and the armor-plated homophobia we see in this thread.
Well, I'd bend this excellent post a bit this way:
Buddhism and the many older "religions" throughout the world that revered the creative processes inherent in nature and the cosmos are, were nonauthoritarian, non heirarchal, often polyamorous and female-centered.
The patriarchal war god we know in our familiar Abrahamic religions is a creation of the Bronze Age. He first appeared in the authoritarian form we're still stuck with on the Central Asian steppe among Indo-European horse-riders. This god as alpha male with a inner fear of his own homoeroticism is the origin of militarism, fascism, and the armor-plated homophobia we see in this thread.
Interesting view. I can't say I disagree with it, although I have no problem with the notion of the Abrahamic religions' concept of God.
Comments
Last time I checked people weren't born polygamists.
Prove that.
I don't have a problem with people being gay - each to their own - but this fact together with Apple's willingness to make enormous profits from doing business/exploiting labour in countries with abysmal human rights records and deplorable labor standards—and to remain conveniently quiet about this—reeks of extreme hypocrisy. Where's your voice on these far more important issues, Tim? Where are the slick videos and Apple parades and public statements and marches?
Tim Cook hasn't remained quiet on working conditions in China. Quite the opposite. There's even a slick part of Apple's website dedicated to the subject.
You're going to have to find another stick to beat him with.
Now if only Apple would match for human rights where Christian pastors are separated from their families, placed in jail without trial, tortured, and terrorized simply for their beliefs in Muslim nations.
Or marching for freedom of speech (oh never mind. They have an issue with the confederate flag all of a sudden, but continue to sell music that encourages the murder of peace officers).
Not sure how marching in a gay parade equals inclusion. They've hired gay people already right, so they've included them. Didn't think they'd have to make the apple logo into a gayified version. That's going a bit far. Apple is a hardware/software conpany. Not a sexual orientation company.
So cook is gay. That's his personal choice. Doesn't mean he has to use the company as a vehicle to shove it down everyone's throat.
Why is it that every 'Apple is too gay' bod is obsessed with something being shoved down their throat?
And this is why America is doomed folks. The Supreme Court should not be legislating. Why do you think we have a legislative branch, which is Congress. The Supreme Court is not part of the Legislative Branch. It is the Judicial Branch.
They didn't legislate, they simply ruled that the 14th amendment applied to the situation. The 14th amendment was put in place by the legislative branch.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Seems pretty clear cut that LGBT people were being denied rights at the state level, SCOTUS simply enforced the 14th amendment. Unless you feel that the States should be able to supersede the constitution.
America was founded on belief in god just look on the dollar bill, it says in god we trust
belief in god has been deeply rooted in American society until the last century and a lot of people still believe
Under god wasn't added to the dollar bill until the 50s, due to the whole red threat/communism scare.
".. American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State"
While I won't argue that much of the constitution isn't based on traditional Judeo-Christian, our country was formed by those who were escaping religious prosecution. Pretty sure they wouldn't want one religions values forced upon all citizens.
I have wondered for years why no one has challenged the use of the phrase "In God We Trust" on Federal Reserve Notes and U.S. Mint coins. Technically, the Federal Reserve isn't part of the U.S. government, it's privately owned, but there is no such excuse at the U.S. Mint. Surely "In God We Trust" on coins is both unconstitutional and for the religious, blasphemous.
UPDATE: Evidently there have been more legal challenges than I thought. I find the Supreme Court's rationale vacuous and unconvincing in the defense of the continued use of such a blatantly religious phrase. If it really has no religious import whatsoever, then it's discontinuance should be immediate. Mindless jingoism is no excuse for unconstitutionality, no matter how much the public supports it.
Quote:
"In God we trust" as a national motto and on U.S. currency has been the subject of numerous unsuccessful lawsuits.[30] The motto was first challenged in Aronow v. United States in 1970, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled: "It is quite obvious that the national motto and the slogan on coinage and currency 'In God We Trust' has nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of religion. Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemblance to a governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise."[31] The decision was cited in Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, a 2004 case on the Pledge of Allegiance. These acts of "ceremonial deism" are "protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because they have lost through rote repetition any significant religious content."[32] In Zorach v. Clauson (1952), the Supreme Court also held that the nation's "institutions presuppose a Supreme Being" and that government recognition of God does not constitute the establishment of a state church as the Constitution's authors intended to prohibit.[33]
Aside from constitutional objections, President Theodore Roosevelt took issue with using the motto on coinage which he considered to be a sacrilege using God's name on money.[34]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_God_we_trust
http://openjurist.org/432/f2d/242/aronow-v-united-states
That one lost.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/12/atheists-in-god-we-trust_n_3916762.html
This one was dismissed.
And Newdow's appeal (you don't remember him?) was also rejected
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/05/29/us-appeals-court-in-god-we-trust-on-currency-not-a-violation-of-first-amendment/
I think the relative ease and safety of living in the US gives some folks waaay too much leisure time with little to worry about. So they look for petty issues to absorb their attention.
I would say there isn't really anything great or even good about Canada. You are a social experiment gone bad.
Ask anyone in the LGBT community or anyone who isn't white.
And socially, Canada is an example for the rest of the world. I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. Probably from the very same ideology that is preoccupied with denying others the same basic rights *you* have on the basis of sexual orientation.
And to the fundies and assorted varieties of religious conservatives in this thread:
God made black holes, nebulae, stars that burn at 25,000 Kelvin, and the closet some of you are still clearly in. He doesn't care who your insignificant ass shags or marries.
Why isn't Tim Cook marching for his minority employees? His handicapped employees? Females? Suicidal Chinese factory employees who make Apple products and work long hours at a highly stressful job with low income???
If Cook were showing support for his religious employees - which statistically speaking, most likely outnumber his gay employees by a very large margin, that would not mean that he was against same-sex couples.
Ducking my question with childish sarcasm is not an answer, so I'll say it again: Why isn't Tim Cook out there marching for his employees with religious beliefs?
Are you marching for all those things? If you aren't why not?
Who's religious views should he be marching for?
Actually, "Marriage Equality" isn't the law. If it was, polygamists could be married too.
There are a few of those in the bible.
Why isn't Tim Cook marching for his minority employees? His handicapped employees? Females? Suicidal Chinese factory employees who make Apple products and work long hours at a highly stressful job with low income???
If Cook were showing support for his religious employees - which statistically speaking, most likely outnumber his gay employees by a very large margin, that would not mean that he was against same-sex couples.
Ducking my question with childish sarcasm is not an answer, so I'll say it again: Why isn't Tim Cook out there marching for his employees with religious beliefs?
At the very least I guess it can be said because he has a shred of common sense. Religion is the cancer of the world, it was invented to control and enslave people, and goddamn does it still work brilliantly.
You would think in the modern world some people would be able to shake the cob webs out of their heads and say, "Holy shit...we've been following some insane falsehood invented by nearly illiterate medieval nobles for the purposes of controlling and brainwashing the population, and allowing the weak few to rule the many...I think we stop now,"
On the other hand, it's unconstitutional. Strict adherence to and the consistent application of the laws based on the Constitution is the reason for the Federal government to exist in the first place. That there are so many overlooked and ignored constitutional violations by government that go unaddressed in this day and age is a sure sign that the Federal system has outlived its "sell by" date.
Religion isn't the problem. Buddhists never bothered anyone, and Zen Buddhism in particular is something a lot of folks should look into as a matter of course. Then again, these aren't deistic "religions."
The problem is how it is used.
Some folks have a very poor (and warped) relationship with religion.
Jobs never used Apple as his personal soap box.
Bullshit, sure he did. When he had issues with Flash and with DRM he wrote essays that were hosted on the Apple website. We all just agreed with them so no one batted an eye.
This has to do with the wellbeing of Cook’s employees across the country and is a new issue that wasn’t brought to a polling point when Jobs was around. He obviously had no issues with gay people since he handed his keys to the kingdom to a gay man. This is his flash/drm issue – the only difference is that it effects employees rather than code and codecs. And like the issue with Flash, you may or may not agree with it, but don’t pretend jobs did nothing like this.
Ducking my question with childish sarcasm is not an answer, so I'll say it again: Why isn't Tim Cook out there marching for his employees with religious beliefs?
By marching with LGBT he is, but apparently you're too blind to recognize it.
Thinking Apple shouldn't be involved in political causes that don't concern their business =/= 'homophobia'.
It's just "political" to conservatives who are assholes.
When the SCOTUS has to make a ruling and its a 5-4 vote with the Chief Justice actually reading his decent from the bench, it's not a new world. The LGBT community and Gay Marriage is no more accepted right now then it was before the ruling. If people were against it they are against it today. For some that may have been on the fence regarding the issue they are now most likely against it because in general the American population does not like having a court overturn the wishes of the people.
Also just because Federal law now says they can get married doesn't mean the states are just going to go along with it. Our Federal government tends to pick and choose what laws they want to enforce, state legalization of pot in Colorado is a perfect example. Colorado is violating Federal law, yet the government is doing nothing about it.
When all the parties and parades are over everyone is going to come to the conclusion nothing has really changed. A court can't make someone accept something they don't want or like. Having a court force something upon a state or the people of that state doesn't breed acceptance it will only breed more hate.
Also if anyone thinks that once SCOTUS makes a ruling nothing can be done or it will never change then I suggest you read something like the Dred Scott v. Sandford ruling in 1857, clearly that ruling isn't in effect. It's somewhat amazing to me that people think something that is so divisive it needs SCOTUS to rule on it that somehow means progressive change.
On a side note it would be nice is Tim Cook concentrated more on his job, since becoming CEO his rollouts of new hardware and software pretty much suck.
And for the longest time people felt the same way about removing racial segregation from our society – some still have issues with it. If we only rule with what the majority is willing to agree on only the status quo remains. Our history shows that the people en masse don’t always choose what is good for us as a whole but rather what is “easy” and what may not “rock the boat” on topics they are not on the “outs” on. When this no longer becomes a big deal, people will forget what the big issue is, just like racial integration, just like women’s right to vote, just like interracial marriage.
I know it’s not cut and dried – not everything the people are “technically for” (I use that really loosely) should be over turned – but that’s what the supreme court is for. To look at the constitution as written and contrast it with the society we want to be. Many states had amended their constitution to include wording not originally included or intended specifically to exclude people from a legal marriage. This ruling course-corrected that.
As far as Tim Cook goes, he’s been doing a great job and apple has reached new heights under his guidance. None of Apple’s products, both software or hardware, have been without issue and many duds had been created well before his tenure. You are just mad he’s doing this. That’s unfortunate but you are not his boss and you are free to purchase other products if you find these have too much “suck”.
Well, I'd bend this excellent post a bit this way:
Buddhism and the many older "religions" throughout the world that revered the creative processes inherent in nature and the cosmos are, were nonauthoritarian, non heirarchal, often polyamorous and female-centered.
The patriarchal war god we know in our familiar Abrahamic religions is a creation of the Bronze Age. He first appeared in the authoritarian form we're still stuck with on the Central Asian steppe among Indo-European horse-riders. This god as alpha male with a inner fear of his own homoeroticism is the origin of militarism, fascism, and the armor-plated homophobia we see in this thread.
Well, I'd bend this excellent post a bit this way:
Buddhism and the many older "religions" throughout the world that revered the creative processes inherent in nature and the cosmos are, were nonauthoritarian, non heirarchal, often polyamorous and female-centered.
The patriarchal war god we know in our familiar Abrahamic religions is a creation of the Bronze Age. He first appeared in the authoritarian form we're still stuck with on the Central Asian steppe among Indo-European horse-riders. This god as alpha male with a inner fear of his own homoeroticism is the origin of militarism, fascism, and the armor-plated homophobia we see in this thread.
Interesting view. I can't say I disagree with it, although I have no problem with the notion of the Abrahamic religions' concept of God.
Well said.
Oh, and I just noticed:
"Fundies" is a play on "fundamentalists."