So you think that you can judge and tell people who and how to love each other, but you think people who think homosexuality is a perversion are bigots? Double standard?
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 CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for Equality
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Because some will take exception to his preferences. It is not just Tim, he represents Apple and the stockholders. It will not be an issue to some but it will be to others.
I just feel he announcement was unnecessary of it was only to make him "feel proud". Sorry but it is my opinion.
And what do you think that agenda is?
Because what the community is fighting for aren't falsehoods. In more than half of the states, a trans person can be fired, for being trans. In half the states you can be fired for being gay, I should know, I got fired for that exact reason. My life offended my Christian (member of the World Harvest Church) boss at the time.
As a lesbian, you know what my agenda is? Being able to marry my girlfriend, and have myself and other LGBTQIA people to be protected under the law like other people.
EXACTLY. They didn't solve the issue by just calling everyone (male and female) a Man.
The argument by folks on this forum is that same sex marriage needs to be called marriage in order for it to be equal. NO IT DOES NOT!
Logical error on your side: Anyone making an argument needs to _prove_ that the argument holds. Anyone using some god thing as an argument needs to _prove_ that this god exists, or their argument is void. I don't have to prove anything.
If I don't want to teach her about different sexualities in grade school I don't have that choice unless I pull her out of public school. That choices made for me. They also choose whether or not to let my kids talk about her faith in school, which they don't by the way. Inequality.
The CEO reports to the board, who report to the stockholders, who are the owners of the company. It isn't win/lose. It can be win/win. However, a good CEO had better set priorities, and the first one had better be to his boss, like others do in their work.
If you say whatever is whatever, why should we listen to you on definitions of terms? What makes you the lord of terminology?
You are off topic, not me. I started it. Good grief.
To answer your only real question in this post. "Why that union cannot be called marriage? It is different. The same way we do not call a woman a man. She is DIFFERENT.
So, we're back around to God *explicitly* saying that a raped woman must marry her rapist, or be put to death, apparently based on "what He determines to be wrong or right behavior, and the consequences of each".
Still waiting for the 'context' where that makes sense...
See, I agree there. If siblings/cousins, truly feel romantic affection towards each other, and they know the risks of reproduction, I'd be a hypocrite to say their love is any less valid than mine. When it comes to parent/child, I think there is a greater potential of abuse, but again, who am I to say no to two consenting adults.
As to polyamory, I'm a firm believer that there are people out there that are capable of loving more than one person, and like before, consenting adults.
right which comes to the simple semantics argument. Whats the point of having two terms to explain the same basic principle.
If by the very legal letter of the law, both terms are identical in all but word. Why create the unnecessary distinction other than to be distinctly aware that there is a difference. Is that not inequality?
I've often heard this argument and It bothers me. if true equality is the goal, than perhaps a new term is needed. And marriage stricken from all books and legal documents. All going forward, no matter what gender, sexuality or type, it is now "partnership". all legal reference to marriage stricken. it is no longer a term used by law.
What would you think the reaction to that is?
However, regarding the "family unit" thing. it's a very tough thing to consider. Anything is better than an orphanage. I came from a solid nuclear family. two parents who are still happily married. 2 siblings. it was wonderful
But I also had friends from "broken homes". who turned out to be amazing people. I have had friends with gay parents who turned out perfectly normal. I've had friends who were adopted who were perfectly normal and even one friend who grew up in orphanages, who is perfectly normal.
however, a couple "bad eggs" have all come from the standard nuclear family. What does this show us in regards to this. there's been no clear evidence to really show that the makeup of the family is indicative of how the child turns out. How those kids are treated within their families are a greater influence
Why should you have control over the curriculum as opposed to another parent or school official?
Do you have evidence that other children or actively allowed to discuss other faiths or the lack of existence of God? Sounds like you don't understand what inequality means.
I asked you a question and you brought irrelevant stuff into your non-answer of the question.
There are an infinite number of differences between one married couple and another, yet they are both considered married. If you want that argument to actually make any sense, you need to explicitly identify which differences are actually pertinent to the definition, and why those differences are so core to the definition of the word that they cannot be argued as unsuitable criteria for the definition.
You're probably right, we have no creator, just like the iPhone. It just appeared. Poof.
You seem not to have read what he said.
Paraphrasing: He believes that he has benefited from the courage and the work of many gay people. And by saying that the CEO of Apple is gay, _he_ can in turn help many gay people who are in a less strong position than he is.
You can easily see how necessary that is by reading some of the posts in this thread.
You're probably right, we have no creator, just like the iPhone. It just appeared. Poof.
Of course not. The iPhone is the product of intelligent design. The universe is the product of the laws of nature. And the sound was a bit louder.
Technically it does. But who cares? How does it affect your life at all if a couple of gay people can get married? Let them do their thing.. that's what America is supposed to be.. "free".
The fact that there's 70 pages about this is a despicable testament to how far society still has to go. So many people still stuck in the 19th century.
It's also quite funny to hear religious people whine about the "redefinition of marriage" like religion invented the term. Pro-tip: marriage has been around for longer than organized religion.
- Status