Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for Equality

Status
Not open for further replies.
brianvictor7 said:
You must not believe in a lot of things about history then. Half of the "original" scripture, pardon the metaphor, of evolution is no longer there, but people still believe in it (actually, I am a theistic evolutionist, so perhaps that doesn't say as much as I'd like it to? :D )
Click to expand...

i look at the bible and god this way.


would you believe me if i said i could walk out side and wave a wand and turn a frog into a princess?.....NO.

same as i would not believe you could slap 2 hands together to communicate to a dead spirit.


evolution stands on its own , i do not need history as evolution happens every day(viruses and genetics) , so far i have not seen god pumping out more earths in the atmosphere.
 
Have no problem with Tim being proud that he is gay but he also has responsibility to the stock holders or which the majority are not gay and some will take exception to his preferences.

Just do not think it was appropriate.
 
Macboy Pro said:
Sometimes simple works and it is a simple issue.
Click to expand...

Removing an exclusion from the list would make it simpler. This is unfocused and doesn't help your argument.

People want to make it complex because that is the only way they can even try to talk about it.
Click to expand...

People make issues complex because they can't converse about them if they are simple. Is this some sort of inverse cognitive disorder where someone cannot discuss the weather but has no problem solving partial differential equations, for example? I would like documented, peer-reviewed evidence of this phenomenon you speak of.

You can have "same sex unions" (or whatever) and marriages. They can both be 100% equal. It the agenda was to be equal, this debate would be over. NOPE, that is not the agenda, and that was my original point.
Click to expand...

And now we get to the true diverting. The argument is not about agenda or what is truly equal. The argument is a simple question. Why can't the definition change? If your reply doesn't address that, you're deliberately going off topic.

The agenda is to get affirmation that two men who are in a union is the same as a man and a woman who are married. Mentally, they emotional and physical attraction may be the same, their love may be the same,etc. But it is still NOT the same. Just like a man compared two a woman is not the same. The man is different, the woman is different. Both deserve equal rights, equal opportunity, and equal treatment from all. But they are "MAN" and "WOMAN" NOT the same.
Click to expand...

A man and a man is indeed a different pairing than a man and a woman. But this doesn't address why that union cannot be called a marriage. Please stay on-topic.
 
Newtons Apple said:
I agree with you 100% except he is the CEO of Apple and many will not approve. His number one job is the responsibility to the stock holders and i do not find his comments to be helpful to AAPL today. Time will tell in the next week or so.
Click to expand...

Why should it be an issue?
 
Meister said:
Blocking people because they disagree with you isn't the smartest thing to do imo.
My ignore list is empty and always will stay empty.
Click to expand...

There is a difference between blocking someone who disagrees with you for a valid reason and blocking someone who refuses to participate in reality or deal with logic and facts. I have no patience for such a person.
 
unobtainium said:
This is great, but you're arguing against people who are unlikely to understand the concept of historical change over time. They probably think the world is only 4000 years old and things have always been the way they are now, in their recent lifetime.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, the image I linked to covered that particular avenue of dispute. All nicely and neatly condensed from the very document upon which the base their unwavering belief that marriage has *always* been 'one man and one woman'.
 
Macboy Pro said:
But wait. When a womans average salary is 20% less than a man, no one ever though they need to change her name to a man to fix the issue.
Click to expand...

I don't remember seeing any law saying women have to be paid less than 20% than men.. do you?

I DO see laws saying married men and women can receive different benefits, tax breaks, insurance discounts, housing and employment rights, and other differences from gay couples.

So, let's redefine marriage to include gay couples.

Problem solved.

Thanks.
 
Meister said:
Besides the term marriage, don't you think that people should have a right to choose their life partner(s)?
Click to expand...

Yep, I have said I am not arguing against that. Just don't force the redefinition of marriage. Call it something else and we should as a society treat them exactly the same, not discrimination, nothing different except it is NOT "Marriage" by definition.

We should treat a man and woman the same, equal, and not discriminate whatsoever. But we should not call a woman and man or vice versa. They have a definition that distinguishes their differences.
 
So we have gone from Tim Cook admitting that he loves man-balls on his chin and him burning in hell and making Jesus cry, to what is the man and what is the marriage...

It was an interesting 3 minutes I wasted on this thread, but that is life and every lesson is paid for one way or the other...

All I can say after reading bits of this thread is that I sincerely hope I never meet some of you... Ever...
 
Meister said:
What if the family members are of the same sex or sterile? Why isn't that legal? Why isn't polygamy legal?
Click to expand...

I think incest is wrong because it's important to keep a seperation between the inherent love you feel towards your family members and sexual desire. Obviously it also runs the risk creating abnormal children even if a person thinks they are infertile.

Polygamy is wrong because a married relationship should be about commitment. Nobody is stopping you holding off making that kind of commitment if you find it difficult.

These are both quite different things to homosexuality.
 
Macboy Pro said:
But wait. When a womans average salary is 20% less than a man, no one ever though they need to change her name to a man to fix the issue.
Click to expand...

No, what they did do was redefine the law so that a woman could not be discriminated against at work for the sole reason of being a woman. In the uk at least.
 
Newtons Apple said:
I agree with you 100% except he is the CEO of Apple and many will not approve. His number one job is the responsibility to the stock holders and i do not find his comments to be helpful to AAPL today. Time will tell in the next week or so.
Click to expand...

His no. 1 priority is to the stockholders? What about the employees that make and sell the products? All the stockholders did was give them some money ages ago. Or did the stockholders come up with the iPad, iPhone, iOS, ApplePay? You know, all the things that are making Apple billions, and that the stockholders are all clamouring for...
 
pooleman said:
You are understating the reach and the saturation of the homosexual lobby has already had on the general public. to talk about a quality but it's not equal. My kid can't talk about our faith school but we have to hear about the homosexuality in the school. I'm done with it. One belief is fine to talk about and one needs to be shut down.

You don't want to equality. You don't want true tolerance. You want equality for what you believe it. You want tolerance for what you think should be tolerated. But you don't want equality intolerance for everyone. And that's wrong.
Click to expand...

yeah, I believe if a topic is open for equal discussion, than it is open for all.

Want to talk about A religion, than you talk about all religions (and also not believing in religion).

You want to talk about Homosexuality in school, you also talk about the entire LGBT, straight, CIS, and all.

the way to true equality IMHO is through education. Give everyone the right to knowledge and let them choose.

if yo want your child to learn your religious background, you should have that right to teach them. This doesn't preclude however teaching the sciences.

if I want to choose that my kid never learns religion, I have that right as well.

It isn't a zero sum game.
 
LordVic said:
its a good question. (I hope you're asking in seriousness for understanding and not trying to make some slippery slope point)

And i dont know if I'm qualified to really provide an answer.

But it's not a bad one.

For example. What if Two brothers live together for their lives. They're not sexually active (obviously no sexual attractiveness between them), but choose to live together in all other forms of the idea of marriage.

Should they not also be entitled to the same benefits in society as a married couple?

I think the point is, when you're asking such questions, ask of them with empathy. Don't just assume what you believe to be truth is in fact the truth, but ask how does this affect them. How does it affect you. how does it affect eachother, the world, society.

There are always multiple stakeholderse to every situation. And multiple different ethical thoeries in which to base your decision on. Without an objective truth to define what is right or wrong, it is up to reasonable human beings to try and find a reasonable ballance in morality. To define that line, to be as encompassing of all as possible.

and to be honest. If brother wants to **** brother behind closed doors. Who am I to judge. I'm not participating in it. they're not forcing me to participate. so be it?
Click to expand...
Your explanation shows that human relationships are complex and can not be labeled.

I personaly believe though that there is value to the traditional family especially when children are involved. I think they should be raised by a man and woman who love each other and them, if possible. A loving same-sex couple however is better than an orphanage.

Besides that their should be the option to have registered partneships that have the same legal effect as a traditional marriage. I also think that only the traditional man-woman partnership should be labeled "marriage" because I think that it's important to keep some stability, tradition and because religious folks got dips on the term. Even famous gay people like Karl Lagerfeld believe that there is a difference between a traditional marriage and a same sex partnership.

Both should be equal before the law and people should respect or at least tolerate each other.
 
Symtex said:
I am not offended one bit. You have the right to have your own beliefs. I do reserve the right to critique them in the same fashion you have the right to criticize me. It should be an open dialogue. I am sure, that deep down, we share a lot of common values. The only difference is that I think the "god" part is not needed.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the response. I had this one teacher that had us write down our beliefs as far as country, religion, and social issues. She took them home, and a week later, after we had forgotten about the assignment, she wrote one of the items on the board and had us write down if we agreed or disagreed with the item on the board. Just that. Agree or disagree.
The following week, she said, "you're just like the rest of the world! Of the things I wrote on the board, 90% of you disagree with it."

I agree with you that we should start things on what we have in common, and use that to bind us together, rather than focus on the differences.

A devout Jew, a committed Atheist, a devout Mormon, and a devout Muslim walk into a restaurant, and...

... They had a great lunch talking about the things they have in common.

To you, Symtex, if we ever meet in person, I hope to have a great lunch with you too.
 
Lictor said:
A word is not defined. A word is used. And that's the use that dictate its meaning. The use can shift completely over time. Other centuries of use, a word can mean the opposite of what it meant in the beginning or something completely different. Language is not an absolute or does not carry any truth it's just something that is always evolving...

For instance, if you had checked into a real dictionary, you would have found the following definitions :
"Man : A human regardless of sex or age; a person."
"Man : The human race; mankind: man's quest for peace."
Click to expand...

I don't have time to go stupid here. When was the last time you walked up to a woman and called her a Man without getting slapped. Yes, Man can be used to describe man and woman together.
 
I have never been to an Apple Store when I didn't think most of the employees were gay, SO WHAT!! Hell, I thought Steve Jobs was gay until well after he had passed!! It doesn't change my opinion of Apple, or any other company. I use Apple products because they are quality machines. The company tries very hard to keep its consumers satisfied, and for the most part they succeed. I have never talked to an Apple employee or dealt with a problem with one of their products where I left unsatisfied. The only time who someone sleeps with matters to me is if it's my wife they're sleeping with!! This is not really a revelation, and pretty much changes nothing, Tim Cook chose to divulge his personal life that's his prerogative, but to me it doesn't really prove much of anything, he's already at the top!!

As for those of you "diversity" experts calling those who beleive in a God, "uneducated" and "stupid," congratulations on your public display of hipocracy! "Diversity" goes both ways and you fail!! But hey, what do I know I'm an "idiot" that I beleives in something that cannot, and never will be explained!! I wonder how many of you have coexist stickers on your Datsun station wagon??

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." -Albert Einstein (you know the father of modern physics?)
 
Damned if you do damned if you don't. Quite honestly if Tim Cook was in front of me right now I would tell him to just ignore all the idiots.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back