Aren't YOU trying to force your personal belief on me by being against gay marriage? You've got a very flawed argument, there. Especially considering that you continue to claim that you're against gay marriage because of what gay rights groups do. Shouldn't your opinion be based on, say, the merits of actual gay marriage rather than the behaviour of certain groups that advocate it? That's like saying you chose not to buy a car because you didn't like the commercial, despite the fact that the car, itself, is actually a very good car.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Among 60 Companies to File Statement with U.S. Supreme Court Backing Gay Marriage
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Aren't YOU trying to force your personal belief on me by being against gay marriage? You've got a very flawed argument, there. Especially considering that you continue to claim that you're against gay marriage because of what gay rights groups do. Shouldn't your opinion be based on, say, the merits of actual gay marriage rather than the behaviour of certain groups that advocate it? That's like saying you chose not to buy a car because you didn't like the commercial, despite the fact that the car, itself, is actually a very good car.
It's not a war over words, it's a war over ideology. Gay rights supporters have no problem with the institution of marriage as it currently is, they just want it to be opened up to them because they had no choice in the matter. Opponents had no problem with the institution of marriage until this issue came up and then all of a sudden they say government should have no role in marriage. Funny, they had no problem with it when they walked down the aisle.
----------
They've done it in the past. Why didn't you stop giving them your money then? And while we're at it, let's rethink the word "given". You gave them nothing. You TRADED a predetermined amount of money for a product in return. Unless you made a donation to Apple you have no point here. You have a choice where to buy electronics from, it's called capitalism.
Many people think that gay marriage is an extremely important issue, much like things like black and women's rights. Personally, I think it says A LOT about a society if they discriminate against a certain group. If I was American, I'd be extremely embarrassed that this is even an issue up for debate. It just seems rather backwards.
And Apple has PLENTY of money. It's not as if giving money to a cause prevents them from doing anything else. They aren't short of money, so that R&D loses out. And the stock going downhill has nothing to do with whether or not they donate to political causes. To suggest otherwise is rather naive.
Obviously, they just use it as an excuse. It's like saying "Honestly I really don't care about slavery, let them be free if they want to, but don't try to sit next to me on the bus or anything because that's just shoving it in my face".
----------
It is embarrassing. Especially when over half of the country supports marriage equality. It's not a matter of "if" at this point, it's a matter of when. As soon as the Supreme Court throws out DOMA this year, it should effectively legalize same sex marriage nation wide.
It's not a statement that one is able to agree or disagree with. It is simply the conditions upon which I will engage.
Because someone had to work it all out, otherwise 200,000 years of hominid evolution is going to go down the tubes. We are in a new age (I think I'm the first to see it clearly). The first age lasted about 200,000 years up to the age of agriculture about 10,000 years ago which was the beginning of civilisation, then the third age began around 400 years ago with Newton. And it's now time for a completely new paradigm, so that humanity can fully realise it's potential.
Don't worry, my work is going to annoy the self righteous gay lobby who are just venting their annoyance on a cause they don't understand, but it's going to annoy the Christian religious groups just as much.
Because my work upholds all the "Christian" ideals, but only the common sense ones. However it upholds these ideals in a way that is contrary to their hypocritical interpretations.
Your argument doesn't seem very well thought out. You claim you don't like same-sex couples having a family, yet you think opposite sex couples having biological children promotes family unity. Wouldn't same-sex couples having children do the same thing? Isn't the whole idea to strengthen the family bond, which conservatives keep saying is the basis of society. Shouldn't allowing gays and lesbians to marry be a good thing for society because it strengthens their relationships and thus the bonds of society as a whole?
And whether you like it or not, a civil union is not the same as a marriage, to a lot of people. Personally, I don't care in the least, but to most of society, gay and straight, marriage is something that people wish for. I don't know any little girls who dream of having a civil union ceremony. It's also not the most romantic thing to ask someone to enter into a civil union with them.
Like it or not, marriage is not strictly a religious institution and probably has never been. I know plenty of non-religious people who got married. And they didn't do it for tax purposes or because they wanted children.
You sound so intellectual, you must be smarter than everyone else because you subtly imply that you are.
What I wonder, is what these people think when they watch a movie like Lincoln. How self aware are they when they watch the scenes where the obviously racist pro-slavery people try to argue their case, and look completely ignorant while doing so? Fast forward 50 years, and how do you think anti-gay marriage advocates will be looked at?
It's funny you bring that up because I have used that point in my arguments in the past, and they basically agree that they are outnumbered but they say that they don't care how they are viewed historically and that they will not change their views just to appease the majority.
As long as you're the one talking about it, I don't think gay rights advocates have any reason to worry. You just seem to be another voice in a shrinking chorus.
I assume you're self publishing.
They will have nothing to say. They will still be against it but their opinion is irrelevant. Just like there are plenty of people today who still oppose interracial marriage despite the fact that it has been legal for nearly 50 years.
So if you support gay marriage...
you're gay? I don't think so.
These are 50 major corporations, in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court, which will be giving a verdict on the matter this summer. This is way more than the sexual preference of this or that CEO.
you're gay? I don't think so.
These are 50 major corporations, in an amicus brief to the Supreme Court, which will be giving a verdict on the matter this summer. This is way more than the sexual preference of this or that CEO.
That's the stupidest point someone can make. Honestly if you are going to argue a point you may as well at least attempt to argue it based on fact.
Here's some facts for you:
Human sexuality is a continuum and is not defined as either gay or straight. Look up the Kinsey scale for more information.
Studies have taken place that have concluded that homosexuality is significantly different enough from "paraphilia" that homosexuality is not a deviation.
What was your point? Were you trying to say that gay people and people in general are on the same level as dogs? If you weren't trying to say that than don't try to infer it.
I don't know whether to respect them or pity them. Probably neither. It's not really about appeasing the majority. It's about doing the right thing. But I guess that's lost on them, isn't it?
I have read the 500 plus posts in this thread. There are a majority that support Apple and it's backing of gay marriage, and I applaud Apple and the other 59 companies. Then there are the naysayers, the bigots and homophobics, the twisted religious posters who reinterpret and project the hatred of scripture long since disproved.
I am fortunate to live in New Zealand where there are civil unions for gay and hetrosexual couples. Our parliament is presently progressing a bill that will give 'marriage' to gays, lesbians and to hetrosexuals. Yes I'm gay, a card carrying fa@@ot and very very proud, and proud too of NZ. If a little country like ours can do this the why the bias in the States.
Of course we have the advantage of having a Queen as our Head of State. You lost that honour with your tiff over tea tax. Ours is a very diverse community, as is the population in the USA. I cannot understand why y'all just can't get along
NZ has been a leader in so many areas, sporting, social and political. Hell, we even have a National Government (like your republican party) and soon we'll be celebrating gay marriages.
**shakes head in bemusement**
KGB
I am fortunate to live in New Zealand where there are civil unions for gay and hetrosexual couples. Our parliament is presently progressing a bill that will give 'marriage' to gays, lesbians and to hetrosexuals. Yes I'm gay, a card carrying fa@@ot and very very proud, and proud too of NZ. If a little country like ours can do this the why the bias in the States.
Of course we have the advantage of having a Queen as our Head of State. You lost that honour with your tiff over tea tax. Ours is a very diverse community, as is the population in the USA. I cannot understand why y'all just can't get along
NZ has been a leader in so many areas, sporting, social and political. Hell, we even have a National Government (like your republican party) and soon we'll be celebrating gay marriages.
**shakes head in bemusement**
KGB
Companies have every right to join political debates in a democratic society. They are a organization and they can voice their collective opinion.
You would never purchase anything from any medium to large business if you found out the type of influence they have on politics behind closed doors.
Boy, are you full of assumptions. I happen to be for the right for gays to marry. Or more accurately, I'm against the federal government having any say whatsoever in marriage where two consenting adults are concerned. But you said:
This is itself bigotry and thus hypocritical. There is no "the church". There are many churches and many more churchgoers. Some are tolerant, some are intolerant. It's not black and white. Lots of gray area.
I'm an atheist and find that too many who call themselves atheists are at least as judgmental and self-righteous as the churchgoing folk they condemn. I happen to know many Christians who are remarkably tolerant, non-judgmental, and non-dogmatic in their beliefs. I get offended when someone groups them in with the intolerant ones and find it ironic that they do so thinking the others are the bigots. We must be more open minded than painting the "other" with such broad strokes.
It's not over word choice. It's a whole pile of legal benefits that you are entitled to have if you have a marriage certificate. You can file a single tax return. You can visit each other in the hospital when you're sick enough for them to keep out anybody but family. You're family. I think you're just naive about this. I knew an elderly gay couple a few years ago, and they said they had spent a heck of a lot of money on lawyers, which would have been theirs automatically in marriage, like being able to give your partner your estate when you die.
So only gay people support gay marriage and the CEO's personal life determine the positions the company takes?
Wow. Some people here have a real problem, even if they don't realize it.
----------
The church doesn't own marriage. They christen people so next you'll be telling me they own names.
Religion is irrational subscription to a superstitious cult. Religions should be stripped of anything serious on that basis, and they pretty much have.
Of course religious people are overly righteous and claim all manner of rights over people, so not a surprising position.
And your point is?
We'll see won't we. Not just Gay Rights activists, in fact that's not my main target. It's the vast quantity of PhD's who put out university and peer reviewed deductively ill considered nonsense. Like Ann Cahill's "overcoming objectification"
How about teaching girls to put condoms on bananas, masquerading as sex education.
You know what's hilarious though? They have no problem when 2 or 3 companies voice their support that agrees with their view, and they get mad when people protest outside Chik-Fil-A. But when 60 companies support a cause that they stupidly disagree with, all of a sudden they say corporations should stay out of politics and shouldn't voice their opinion on social issues. And they have no problem when hate groups like One Million Moms (or One Million C-words as I like to call them) protest and try to get people to boycott companies like JCP. False advertising btw, they only have a few thousand members, nowhere near a million. Just a few thousand frigid nasty hateful women with black holes instead of hearts.
----------
That when people feel they know everything, it's entertaining to see their reactions when they find out they're wrong.
If i had a dollar for every time a gay compared themselves to black and slavery in this thread, id buy another ipad.
- Status