Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
First off, it's a shame this is considered "news", but it is and Tim should be commended for his reasons for coming out.

It's a shame to see this discussion decend into religious arguing, however here's my take.

I personally don't believe that Cook is going to hell when he passes away, because I don't buy the best selling fiction book called, "The Bible".

When you pass, the lights go out. Game over. Done. No white gates, no big man with a white beard and cloak to welcome you. Santa Claus is more believable than some of the fairy tales that book peddles.

To criticise a good man because of his sexual preference because a fairy tale book says its wrong is woefully hypocritical.
 
Nothing to do with tolerance.

They do care about sexual orientation, there are so many debates. Do you follow the news at all?

Could a gay person become the Pope today? No because they care about his sexual orientation.

Which is really hard to understand. He is supposed to be celibate, which means the pope's sexual orientation is absolutely irrelevant. Who cares whether we have a pope who can't have sex with women or one whocan't have sex with men?
 
I disagree. Who is stopping Tim Cook from being gay? They allow naked people to strut about downtown San Francisco and no one bats an eye. I don't see this oppression.

In many states you can legally be terminated from employment for being gay.
 
Nobody wants you to wear a thong and prance around West Hollywood every year to celebrate "Gay Day".

I don't "celebrate" being gay.

I just get on with my life like everybody else and all I ask is that:

My partner is recognised as my next of kin
Should I need to seek employment that I am not discriminated against because of my sexuality
And a few other rights that you take for granted.

You don't lose any rights. You can still also carry on doing what you do with all the rights that white male Christians have had since the founding of the USA.

As a Christian I disagree with some of your choices.

As an American I agree with what you say and wish you well. I have no ill will toward you or anyone else and think you should get no more or no fewer of the civil protections I enjoy.

I don't appreciate being labelled a bigot because I have a different view from you. And while I am not accusing you of calling me that many on this forum others have called me this for simply having an opinion. I feel discriminated against.

----------

In many states you can legally be terminated from employment for being gay.

What?! I call bs on that one. Can you show me? Please give me a link. I am genuinely curious about that.
 
I happened to discuss with people believing Hitler and the third Reich to be associated with christianity. The origin of the belief seems to be the "Gott mit uns" motto on the Wehrmacht soldiers' belts. Actually the motto and his use on German military apparel predates the third Reich, but still it most likely impresses people.
It's a complex topic and the Nazis borrowed and incorporated chrisitan believes into their state religion out of necessaty, because the churches were powerfull in germany and almost all germans were christians. This does in no way mean that the real Nazis were christians. They were not! Their goal was to eliminate christianity in the long run. The Nazis never killed anyone in the name of christianity. In fact, they killed christian ministers.

Communists on the other hand were atheists, that made fighting other religions their declared goal. They murdered anyone who did not convert to atheism.
 
What?! I call bs on that one. Can you show me? Please give me a link. I am genuinely curious about that.

Searching for sources to cite now. Brb

The grey states have no laws to protect against sexual discrimination of LGBT employees.

959px-LGBT_employment_discrimination_law_in_the_United_States.svg.png
 
...and consumers look for more innovation...

One would be hard pressed to come up with a more fatuous statement. What do we want, 'innovation' when do we want it 'now. The iPad itself was innovative, how much more innovation is possible on a 1/4" slab ferchrissakes. There can be new software features and internal hardware improvements but that's about it.
 
Hitler said all sorts of bizare things. He and his gang of thugs were an amazing asortment of mass murdering weirdos. Hitler was a Nazi. Naziism is a religion initself. He grew up in a catholic environment but he was not a christian.

Hitler did nothing compered with the world mass murderer of all time...STALIN
 
Tim Cook is a good CEO, that's all that matter. Not putting aside his coming out, but I think we need to respect his private choices. People will spin this to politics, religion and social issues just because he is the CEO of the most powerful company in the world, but at the end of the day, it doesn't really matter.
 
I agree. Unfortunelty those preaching tolerance rarely truly practice it.

I find the same to be true of devout followers of Christ. They never seem to love thy neigbors, or do anything remotely close to what Jesus did. You're a shining example of the typical devout followers of Christ I've witnessed.
 
.... And while I am not accusing you of calling me that many on this forum others have called me this for simply having an opinion. I feel discriminated against......

You feel discriminated against for being called a bigot? Imagine how the majority of gay/bi/trans/etc people feel for "simply having an orientation" The difference is these people can't just change their mind like you can.
 
I'm actually surprised this hasn't been announced years ago, given that it was pretty much openly known to people in Silicon Valley and the financial services industry (banks, investment firms, and venture capitalists) in regards to Tim Cook's personal life since at least since the late 1990's.
 
I feel comfortable saying Steve Jobs wouldn't have allowed this.

Anymore remember the days when Apple executives were aloof? Yeah, those were the days under SJ.

Steve just wouldn't want the distraction. He'd want his people working.
 
I feel comfortable saying Steve Jobs wouldn't have allowed this.

Anymore remember the days when Apple executives were aloof? Yeah, those were the days under SJ.

Steve just wouldn't want the distraction. He'd want his people working.
I agree! This has nothing to do with :apple: and it's a shame Tim Cook even brought this up. His privat life is privat.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As a Christian I disagree with some of your choices.

Yep, who you're attracted to is definitely a choice that should be "disagreed" with.

I don't appreciate being labelled a bigot because I have a different view from you.

It's because you are one. If you disagree with the way someone else lives their life the answer is very simple - don't live your life that way. But denying them the rights that other people get because of their gender when they aren't harming other people? That is just prejudicial; how can you not see this?

I'll guarantee you this: one day your grandchildren will be talking about you after you've passed and this view you hold will be a negative mark on what will hopefully otherwise be fond recollection. You will be on the wrong side of history here and it's sad that you can't see that.

And while I am not accusing you of calling me that many on this forum others have called me this for simply having an opinion.

And if I should simply have an opinion that interracial marriages shouldn't be legal I'm not one? That example should disabuse you of the notion that opinions can't be bigoted. Let people be recognized equally under the law if they love each other.

I feel discriminated against.

Hilarious.
 
I work to fight sex trafficking and live around people who are daily dealing with the fallout of violence done to them and their loved ones. That's the darkness vibe you're picking up. I do hope you realize I was condemning the rape in my example.

The point was about doing good for the sake of doing good. You added the dark part of rape as if it's not possible to do good for the sake of it.



You seem to be making this argument: there is no true altruism. Funny I don't often see people who say this going out to build hospitals in third world countries.


Doing good for the sake of doing good would be true altruism. I have no doubts that there are those that do it regardless of their religious beliefs or lack there of. Just like there are those that do stuff for the sake of reward, regardless of what that reward is. I never heard my grandmother say Im doing X so I get into heaven. I did hear her say if I dont go to church Ill end up in hell. Which is saying you must do this to get this and not that. You not hearing person X say Im building a house to show my devotion to god so I get a better chance at getting into heaven doesnt mean that's not what's in their hearts and minds.



Atheism. The uncola of religions.

Ahteism, the lack of belief in a god. Nothing more to it.



I bring up the connection of Lennon to Scripture because he got his ideas of right and wrong from a society built on their principals.


Can you provide evidence that Lennon's view of right and wrong is based on scripture? It's your claim he was inspired by scripture in the first place after all. Let's dig a little more into Lennon's view.


John Lennon: [Imagine] is anti-religious, anti-nationalistic, anti-conventional, anti-capitalistic... but because it is sugar-coated, it is accepted.

Imagine conveyed Lennon's wish for world peace and harmony in simple terms, both musically and lyrically. It was inspired by Cloud Piece, an instructional poem dated Spring 1963 that appeared in Yoko Ono's book Grapefruit.

Imagine the clouds dripping.
Dig a hole in your garden to
put them in.


John Lennon: The World Church called me once and asked, 'Can we use the lyrics to Imagine and just change it to "Imagine one religion"?' That showed they didn't understand it at all. It would defeat the whole purpose of the song, the whole idea.


It could easily be argued that scripture is based on principles that already existed in societies. After all, the oldest known written laws predate the old/new testament by five hundred to a few thousand years. Many of those laws and views can be found later in the old/new testament. They were created long before Christianity was even a thought. Many of those basic laws surviving to this day and many are just not socially accepted, at least in the modern world. So really to say that Lennon's view and inspiration is based on scripture just doesn't hold much water.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.