Me So Holy app rejected

Discussion in 'iOS Apps' started by Compile 'em all, May 11, 2009.

  1. Compile 'em all macrumors 601

    Compile 'em all

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    #1
    http://mesoholy.com/

    They should have seen it coming though!
     
  2. alchemistmuffin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    #2
    Thank goodness that app was rejected.

    My friend who works at Apple showed me this app during the approval process.

    As a consumer, along with couple of my friend, although this is protected by free speech, it's too offensive.

    But I will say this to the developer, resubmit the app again once iPhone OS 3.0 comes out, since it will allow in-app parental controls from the parental control of iPhone and iPod touch.
     
  3. shabbado macrumors member

    shabbado

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    #3
    Gotta find another medium for distributing paid apps...
     
  4. JonHimself macrumors 68000

    JonHimself

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #4
    This is where Apple is running into problems (which I'll be the first to say I doubt I could do any better) but 'offensive' is too subjective of a word to use. I find no offense with this app (and have even done it on my own with photoshop in the past). I certainly understand why some people WOULD be offended but I just don't like that Apple is making these kind of calls (there have been rejections that I'm ok with... or at least understand... like the tethering apps).
     
  5. thomahawk macrumors 6502a

    thomahawk

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Location:
    Osaka, Japan
    #5
    i think anything religiously related apps shouldnt be released. there would be some religious problems and concerns to apple. so its best to just stay out of anything related to religion so you wont get any problems
     
  6. FearNo1 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    #6
    I agree...sounds like a stoopid app. For once I agree with app's restrictive policy. Besides, how about more useful apps instead of silly ones..? :rolleyes:

     
  7. liptonlover macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    #7
    I'm a devout Catholic, but I'm not offended and really I don't think anyone should be. It sounds like something that might offend one person in the US, not something that should be rejected on such grounds.
     
  8. JonHimself macrumors 68000

    JonHimself

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #8
    Surely you can see how this would offend a lot of people though. I'm not offended by it at all and would similarly assume that a lot of people wouldn't care either but religion is potentially a touchy subject for people.
     
  9. brad.c macrumors 68020

    brad.c

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Location:
    50.813669°, -2.474796°
    #9
    I wonder if a digital version of this would be accepted, outside of potential copyright issues.
     
  10. Fe1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    #10
    I'm also Catholic, and as a Westerner, I'm also not offended by the theory of the app, but this rejection isn't necessarily about a specific religion. It's about a guideline established for all religions, to be meted out equally.

    Or does one think that if some jolly joker were to submit a "Me So Mohammed" app, that Apple would approve /that/?
     
  11. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #11
    If you're offended, don't download it :rolleyes:

    If they're going to ban this one for being offensive, they should ban all of the bible apps too. Plenty of offensive things in there.

    But I don't think Apple should be rejecting any apps on the basis that it might be offensive or have some swear words. If you don't like it, don't buy it. That's what the free market is all about.
     
  12. shabbado macrumors member

    shabbado

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    #12
    I agree... I think the app store is becoming more and more conservative. they probably just getting scared of legal actions.
     
  13. Fe1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    #13
    Let me play devil's advocate here.

    This isn't about being offended. It's about respect. I know that's not a big thing in our generation, to have standards which include respect for religion, but maybe it should be.
     
  14. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    A lot of Muslim's would be very offended by that for sure.
     
  15. Fe1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    #15
    Indeed. And since they have extremists who might react with actual physical violence, it's a no-brainer why Apple rejected this. Just ask Denmark.

    EDIT BEFORE POSTING: Actually, I just went to the Me So Holy link. The app is predicated on choosing a religion, then superimposing a photo, all in good fun. I had no problem with it, until now. I see Christian images. I see Jewish images. But what about Muslim, Hindu, etc. etc. images? Holiness isn't just Christian, you know.

    It's all very well to josh, poke fun, and have a laugh, but it's always Judeo-Christianity, isn't it.
     
  16. Compile 'em all thread starter macrumors 601

    Compile 'em all

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    #16
    Why are you trying to make this about Islam vs. Christianity? im pretty sure there are extremists in every religion.

    Back on topic, I have a good feeling that 3.0 will be correcting a lot of these issues with parenting control. So I guess we will have to wait and see :)
     
  17. Fe1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    #17
    Why are you trying to make this about my (subsequent) reaction? I was playing devil's advocate to bring out a point about the specificity of religions.

    I'll ignore the extremists comment, because it's rather forced given the examples we could mention about each religion today.

    Don't think that's going to happen. Religion isn't a behaviour, like swearing or sex. It's not to protect allegedly impressionable minds, like NC-17 ratings are meant to do. That's just the way it is.
     
  18. swindmill macrumors 6502a

    swindmill

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    KY
    #18
    I doubt it's about respect, nor should it be. Who's Apple or anyone else to say that we should respect other's claims about the world. When you take a position on any issue, criticism is fair game.

    As far as being offensive, there are many offensive things available on the market. Apple shouldn't limit apps on this basis any more than a book store limits book titles on this basis; it's a consumer choice issue.
     
  19. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #19
    I don't want to say a whole lot more as I don't want to be the one responsible for sending this to PRSI, but what good are parental controls going to do? It's always the adults who whine about these things anyways, most kids aren't going to be bothered by this. Parental controls might be good for the NIN app so some kid doesn't hear the f word, but it's not going to help here. Apple just needs to approve these apps, if people get offended, they don't have to buy it. Simple as that.
     
  20. kas23 macrumors 603

    kas23

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    #20
    I agree. Sometimes it's hard to know where to draw the line with religion. Apple certainly doesn't want to be subject to a Jihad. Wait, they're American. They already have a Jihad against them. Well, they would want a double Jihad.
     
  21. Fe1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    #21
    I don't want to linger too long on this thread, but just to say that everything in society is predicated on respect -- it's what allows for interaction. If not present or enforced, even every once in a while, it becomes chaotic.

    Having standards is never wrong. Just ask the Mac Rumours forum about theirs.
     
  22. Luap macrumors 65816

    Luap

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    #22
    Sounds like junk to me. Big deal that Apple wont let it on the store.
    Besides, from what I can tell, it doesn't do anything that you cant already do with a (much better) app like Juxtaposer, no?
     
  23. foob macrumors 6502

    foob

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    #23
    If I were Apple, I'd reject it out of fear of the nutjobs who go around suing people for saying "Happy Holidays." I can see the Bill Oreilly types jumping all over this.

    Oh yeah, plus it's stupid.
     
  24. swindmill macrumors 6502a

    swindmill

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    KY
    #24
    There is nothing wrong with having standards, but that has nothing to do with respect...:confused:

    As far as respect goes, I would disagree that respect is what allows for interaction. Treating other people with respect helps, but respecting other's views about the world, no matter how ridiculous, is not necessary or even desirable.

    You may be right that Apple is afraid that this app might be seen as disrespecting religion (which in turn would offend some), and it would be unfortunate if they are blocking apps for this reason.
     
  25. Fe1 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    #25
    Wow, this thread is still going, eh?

    It's like this. Society has deemed it inappropriate to mock people's religion. It causes huge bad feelings, if you do. In practical terms, think of it like insulting your mum.

    Sure, some people here hate their mothers. Some of your mothers are probably crack addict hos. You insult her all the time, so it's no biggie if others do. But most people would be upset if Apple approved an app called "iHumpedYerMom", allowing for the user to superimpose a photo of your mother tied by her wrists on a bed (as an example).

    Why? Because you don't go there. Mothers are inviolate. So is religion. End. Of.
     

Share This Page