Tim Cook Calls 'Religious Freedom' Legislation 'Very Dangerous'

[hindmost]

...with money.

But in all seriousness, good for him to come out against this bigoted legislation.

I noticed Timmy waited long, long years to finally 'come out' and only did so after he became a powerful BILLIONAIRE and CEO of Apple.

I care not who or what he 'loves' be it men or Great Danes..whatever.

However, being CEO of the richest corporation in the world is really not the place to use personal values as a platform. Obviously, Indiana does not hold Tim's personal dreams of a happy social value system.

(signature: " We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm. "---George Orwell)

 

[Intelligent]

I'm sick of this idiot bringing his liberal politics into everything, and now he's doing even worse by jumping into unsubstantiated controversy.

Personally I love it.
Apple as a private company have every right to express their political opinions on whatever they want.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Do you really not understand the difference between discriminating against someone based on their innate natural characteristics and discriminating against someone based on their chosen behavior?

Everyone in this country is free to discriminate against jerks. Jerks are not a a protected class, and jerkiness is not an innate characteristic.

You don't need a law to tell you that you are free to not do business with jerks.

How do you know that being a jerk is not innate? (Trust me, some really seem innate jerks with no hope!)
Being back to the more serious topic, freedom of speech is PROTECTED, therefore the speech of a jerk, priest, gay, anti-gay, white, black, red, green or yellow individual is protected. By your own reasoning, I would be unable to protect myself and my business from jerks.

 

[phillipduran]

I really don't have a problem with companies turning away any customers they want to. They're private businesses they can do what they want.

In the same vein, if there's a company that's run by bigots then customers are free to boycott and put those companies out of business.

Wouldn't we all rather know exactly where we stand with one another?

Well said.

Everyone needs freedom here. Freedom to be the owner of your business and shoppers need the freedom to shop. Allowing the business to deny customers certain services does not deny you your freedom to shop, just your ability to demand services at that shop. Telling the business they have to put their religious beliefs aside in order to run a business DOES interfere with their religious beliefs. Lets try telling a Muslim business they have to put bacon on their burgers. Might not be available at that place. Or perhaps another store refuses to sell certain types of food on certain religious days. That should be respected. The shopper can go elsewhere.

 

[peterdevries]

Same might go for a bakery then. Before entering beginning the contract (the order etc.), you sign a code of conduct. Why can Apple discriminate against some people, while a bakery can't? They are both private entities.

Again, Apple doesn't discriminate. It is very easy to understand if you want to understand it. Opposing gay marriage rights harms a certain sub-group of people, hence that is discrimination. Allowing gay marriage rights does not harm anyone, so it is NOT discrimination.

Here is the definition of discrimination to help you:

The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex

Discrimination is not ok for any company or group. Your understanding of discrimination is flawed.

 

[Huntn]

Talk to any 8yo kid and you'll understand that they don't need such studies

I know several kids around the age of 10 and would have to disagree with you, not to say there aren't some who exist.

 

[Swift]

So Tim Cook says I can't tell him who he can or cannot 'love,' but HE can tell ME what I can or cannot believe?

You can believe what you want, this is about rules for business. A photographer sells his photography, a florist sells flowers, a taxi driver sells taxi rides. Religion has nothing to do with it. A Presbyterian can perform a gay marriage now. A restaurant owner will sell him a meal, right? Oh, yeah: you don't have to gay marry, especially not if you think it's wrong. There, Religious rights don't have to be restored. They were never lost.

 

[rdowns]

No just pointing out the hypocrisy. And the fact that Cook speaks out where it's safe to do so. In the end it's all about $$$.

Really? Were it all about money, he wouldn't be saying anything.

And what hypocrisy?

 

[2010mini]

Not a good example at all. Private U.S. citizens also get plenty of tax breaks and handouts. Welfare, WIC, mortgage interest, child care expenses, child credits, IRA contributions, etc, etc, etc....

I understand you point and agree that businesses (especially publically traded ones) are different from individuals, but a different example might be in order.

Thank you for your post. Very logical and well written response. Sorry we must ban you now so we can get back to the regular internets rage fest. #

 

[shk718]

Since Tim Cook is going there... As a black man, I find it interesting when I go into an Apple Store that I don't see much black people employed by Apple.

There's this one article stating one manager saying "black employees don't reach management." Now I agree that majority of white people shop in Apple Stores. And, I'm not attacking Apple of being a racist company... But I'd rather it be discussed openly to address the situation.

I don't know about Texas (assuming you're from there based on your tag) but here in NYC, I see blind, deaf, tattooed, pierced, male, female, black, white, asian, indian ...... people working at all the Apple stores. Do minorities/women have a hard time getting jobs and promotions in American companies - 100% yes. Does Apple computer need to work harder - sure - are they doing a better job than most companies - yes! Attacking Apple on this issue (like they were attacked for environmental issues) serves no one. They are on the front lines fighting for these issues where most companies don't. Apple should be applauded.

 

[iBlazed]

Wow. Just wow.

So many years on this site and his bigotry is just coming out of the woodwork now. Amazing right?

 

[apolloa]

I really don't have a problem with companies turning away any customers they want to. They're private businesses they can do what they want.

In the same vein, if there's a company that's run by bigots then customers are free to boycott and put those companies out of business.

Wouldn't we all rather know exactly where we stand with one another?

Good for you, I am happy you like idea that if you are white, you can refuse to serve a black person and vice versa.

Because THAT is what you just stated! Get you head out of the gutter of 18th century thinking and move along with human evolution into the 21st century would you?
And knowing where we stand with each other? Erm, we stand in a society where we are supposed to grow the **** up and not judge a book by its cover, where as a black or white person, gay or straight, female or male, Christian or Muslim, you walk around knowing you have the right to live how you want without fear of discrimination, and that INCLUDES walking into a shop or dealing with a business.

Because we've had 2 world wars costing endless lives to fight for that right!

This bill actually sounds like Hitler wrote it himself!

 

[nfl46]

Personally, I think the law is ridiculous. So, you mean to mean to tell me, they will turn away a gay guy dressed like a female? Ridiculous. What they do in their personal life is none of our business.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

It's Religious freedom, folks. Not every freedom we have in the US has a 100% positive outcome (guns, speech, etc.), but it is what it is. Like others have said, if you don't like what the business stands for, don't patronize them. You have that right, too.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Again, Apple doesn't discriminate.
[...]
Discrimination is not ok for any company or group. Your understanding of discrimination is flawed.

I might not be clear. What I am saying is that when such behaviors or laws are enacted, we have to be careful and avoid going on the soapbox, as Cook did.
Today we see the religious couple who is forced to make a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage.
Tomorrow we might see (and we will) a married gay who is forced to make a cake for the "Long live traditional marriage" event, which will include a traditional, demonstrative marriage. Things go both ways, always.

 

[Huntn]

No just pointing out the hypocrisy. And the fact that Cook speaks out where it's safe to do so. In the end it's all about $$$.

Are you trying to say that it's a human thing as the CEO of a trillion dollar company to be a slave to the financial impact of taking a social stand? If I'm not misunderstanding you, I'll counter as a rule, these kinds of positions hurt the bottom line, as compared to being silent. Obviously he feels it's woth whatever the hit for him to take a public stand.

 

[linkgx1]

I really don't have a problem with companies turning away any customers they want to. They're private businesses they can do what they want.

In the same vein, if there's a company that's run by bigots then customers are free to boycott and put those companies out of business.

Wouldn't we all rather know exactly where we stand with one another?

Yet these companies want tax breaks from everyone? You can't have it both ways.

 

[caesarp]

I really don't have a problem with companies turning away any customers they want to. They're private businesses they can do what they want.

In the same vein, if there's a company that's run by bigots then customers are free to boycott and put those companies out of business.

Wouldn't we all rather know exactly where we stand with one another?

But there are anti-discrimination laws. Those laws are on the books. These "religious freedom" laws (bogus name) are to allow the defense of religion to the anti-discrimination laws. Which is absurd. Anyone can pretend they are religious to be discriminatory then. Guess what, my religion says blue eyed people are the devil. So now I can discriminate against blue eyed people -- please. And religious belief is entirely subjective and bogus anyway.

There is no restriction on religious freedom in complying with anti-discrimination laws. No one is saying you can't go to your church or wherever and pray to imaginary sky daddies.

 

[2010mini]

I don't know about Texas (assuming you're from there based on your tag) but here in NYC, I see blind, deaf, tattooed, pierced, male, female, black, white, asian, indian ...... people working at all the Apple stores. Do minorities/women have a hard time getting jobs and promotions in American companies - 100% yes. Does Apple computer need to work harder - sure - are they doing a better job than most companies - yes! Attacking Apple on this issue (like they were attacked for environmental issues) I think is foolish because they are on the front lines fighting for these issues where most companies don't.

This is true. At my last visit to an Apple Store I was helped by a tech in a wheelchair. I was actually quite surprised to see that.

 

[iBlazed]

Personally, I think the law is ridiculous. So, you mean to mean to tell me, they will turn away a gay guy dressed like a female? Ridiculous. What they do in their personal life is none of our business.

I think what you're referring to is a transgender person, not a homosexual, big difference. But your heart is in the right place anyway.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

Good for you, I am happy you like idea that if you are white, you can refuse to serve a black person and vice versa.

Because THAT is what you just stated! Get you head out of the gutter of 18th century thinking and move along with human evolution into the 21st century would you?
And knowing where we stand with each other? Erm, we stand in a society where we are supposed to grow the **** up and not judge a book by its cover, where as a black or white person, gay or straight, female or male, Christian or Muslim, you walk around knowing you have the right to live how you want without fear of discrimination, and that INCLUDES walking into a shop or dealing with a business.

Because we've had 2 world wars costing endless lives to fight for that right!

This bill actually sounds like Hitler wrote it himself!

As far as I know, there aren't any religions that discriminate by race. This law is RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, not racial discrimination, so before you get on your soapbox, at least stay on topic. It's not a black/white issue.

While I am not religious, I know that there are religions that do not approve of Gays, etc. That's what this law is about. While it is discrimination, it's not racial, so don't take it there.

 

[caesarp]

It's Religious freedom, folks. Not every freedom we have in the US has a 100% positive outcome (guns, speech, etc.), but it is what it is. Like others have said, if you don't like what the business stands for, don't patronize them. You have that right, too.

It is NOT religious freedom. No one is being restricted from going to their church or mosque or whatever and praying to their sky daddy. How is anyone's religion being impacted. Its bogus to say that I don't like something cause of my religion, so I'm going to use that in public businesses.

If I'm a Rastafarian can I smoke pot wherever I want, even in state's that didn't legalize pot? Can I smoke pot in a movie theater or in a school -- after all its my religion. See how bogus that is?

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

This is enough for me to declare those trying to defend this heresy liars.



It IS all about bigotry. Maybe with a wink and a nod, but that is their aim. Codifying bigotry into US state law.

 

[Bending Pixels]

To quote Tim Cook - "Open to everyone, regardless of where they come from, what they look like, how they worship or who they love."

Does this mean Mr. Cook is open to conservative Christians who still view marriage as between one man and one woman, and that we can respectfully disagree on the issue?

 

[peterdevries]

I might not be clear. What I am saying is that when such behaviors or laws are enacted, we have to be careful and avoid going on the soapbox, as Cook did.
Today we see the religious couple who is forced to make a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage.
Tomorrow we might see (and we will) a married gay who is forced to make a cake for the "Long live traditional marriage" event, which will include a traditional, demonstrative marriage. Things go both ways, always.

I see your point. But I disagree that it goes both ways. There is a clear harmful and an unharmful way here in my opinion (I'm firmly in the equality camp). However I can also see how strongly religious people might be "hurt" if they have to serve married gay people in their shop.

I think though that we need to work towards a world where people understand that people with differing views do not hurt anyone persé. This is about proper education, where even strongly religious people understand that a lezbian couple with kids, will not infect your daughter to the point that she becomes lesbian too. Or where straight people think that all gays are out to convert or have sex with straight men.

Putting laws in place to force equality is something else than putting laws in place to let people legally practice inequality. The first is not inhibiting anyone in their lives, while the second one is.