U.S. Senate Approves Anti-Discrimination Bill Endorsed by Tim Cook

[MrSmith]

'U.S. Senate Approves Anti-Discrimination Bill Endorsed by Tim Cook'

Seriously? What has Cook's endorsement got to do with any political news? Does this Bill gain extra weight because the Apple leader of the day endorses it? Come to think of it, why is political news being reported on a site dedicated to Apple devices anyway?

 

[bandrews]

You are a bigot.

----------



I don't agree with discriminating against anyone. I think we are all entitled to be treated with dignity and respect.

----------



Jesus consorted with all manner of sinners. He did ask them to "go and sin no more"

Yet rather than "treating me with dignity and respect", you call me a "sinner" because of the way I live my life.
I obey the ten commandments - not out of religious fear but because any half decent human can see they're pretty decent rules to live by, I pay vast amounts in tax, I am involved in and donate a lot to charity and cared for my grandfather, every day for two years up until the day he died, I don't lead an extravagant or promiscuous life, I don't gamble, take drugs. I don't believe there is one facet of my life that seeks to in any way hurt any other human being yet you would call me a sinner because I fell in love with and live with another man?

 

[r.harris1]

The APA up until the mid 70's (maybe 80's, can't remember) held that homosexuality was a brain "defect." Mainly, a condition to be treated. Why did they stop pursuing that? No one knows... There was a large donation of money to the APA and all study of it immediately ceased.

I really don't understand why there is this big deal about it - yes, there are people who are born that way. The bigger is why are we just ok with saying they were born that way? It's clearly a disorder in the brain - human sexuality is (religiously or evolutionarily, whichever you prefer) meant for procreation. A gay couple can't procreate so obviously there's a reason for that. Being gay is like having ADD - it's a mental disorder that changes the way the brain behaves. It's really just another disorder like all the others except rather than study it and realize how to correct this disorder we'd rather go around and say people are fine the way they are and deal with it otherwise you're a bigot. Speaking of... I find it rather intresting that the people who go around saying everyone should be equal and respected are, 99% of the time, the first ones to go around screaming "bigot" or "homophobe" just people someone disagrees with you on a social issue. It's quite a paradox...

I really, really try to stay out of the tedium and vacuousness of religious and political discussions - two areas of humanity that bring out the absolute worst in people (and for no good reason ).

Humanity is one of the many sick jokes of evolution. Yes, one of many results of sex between members of the opposite sex can indeed be procreation, but to say it is the meaning of it is to loose sight of the fact that it can also build bonds and have social meaning too. After all, we're social apes.

My wife and I have chosen not to infest the world with more children. Do we have a brain disorder? Or did we choose to make a social commitment to have no children? Or are we just part of the excellent randomness of evolution that provides the world with a distribution of behaviors that may or may not have meaning? It's not really any different than the distribution of behavior in other species.

----------

For displaying his intolerance towards people who hold different opinions to him.

Isn't he just pointing out inconsistencies in religious thought? Disagreeing with religious thought hardly constitutes bigotry.

 

[Michael Goff]

The APA up until the mid 70's (maybe 80's, can't remember) held that homosexuality was a brain "defect." Mainly, a condition to be treated. Why did they stop pursuing that? No one knows... There was a large donation of money to the APA and all study of it immediately ceased.

I really don't understand why there is this big deal about it - yes, there are people who are born that way. The bigger is why are we just ok with saying they were born that way? It's clearly a disorder in the brain - human sexuality is (religiously or evolutionarily, whichever you prefer) meant for procreation. A gay couple can't procreate so obviously there's a reason for that. Being gay is like having ADD - it's a mental disorder that changes the way the brain behaves. It's really just another disorder like all the others except rather than study it and realize how to correct this disorder we'd rather go around and say people are fine the way they are and deal with it otherwise you're a bigot. Speaking of... I find it rather intresting that the people who go around saying everyone should be equal and respected are, 99% of the time, the first ones to go around screaming "bigot" or "homophobe" just people someone disagrees with you on a social issue. It's quite a paradox...

Words cannot describe how ignorant your line of thought is.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

For displaying his intolerance towards people who hold different opinions to him.

Ha. You have no idea what I tolerate. I was Catholic for 22 years, Evangelist for 5, and studied as a Jesuit for 8 before seeing what most other biblical scholars see when they eventually become atheists. Everyone I know and love still believes in all manner of fairy tales and destructive behavior, and I tolerate all of it.

Trying to sidetrack the discussion by personally attacking me and ignoring my point isn't helping your argument.

 

[citizenzen]

My wife and I have chosen not to infest the world with more children. Do we have a brain disorder?

My wife and I made the same choice.

I personally consider myself very fortunate for having avoided all that.

 

[wongulous]

"Born this way" is sort of vague, though "genetic" isn't right either, because obviously gay parents usually do not make gay kids (just 3-5%), and straight parents usually make straight kids (95-97%), but epigenetics is actually really difficult to understand for most people. Most people don't even know that 98% of human DNA is just non-coding junk, and just 2% makes up the important stuff about us.

Epigenetics ("above DNA") doesn't change your DNA, but it decides how much or whether some genes are expressed in different cells in your body. The study of epigenetics looks at what happens to your genes over the course of your life, and whether those changes could be passed down to your children or even your grandchildren.

If homosexuality isn't epigenetic, it has to be environmental, but either way it's kinda splitting hairs. It happens in-utero.

Point being, it's not a choice—it's only a choice whether or not someone hides it with shame and isn't allowed to be treated equally based on who they love. I mean, I don't see that as sustainable because of a personal religious belief. Which is exactly where ENDA comes into play.

 

[MrSmith]

The APA up until the mid 70's (maybe 80's, can't remember) held that homosexuality was a brain "defect." Mainly, a condition to be treated. Why did they stop pursuing that? No one knows... There was a large donation of money to the APA and all study of it immediately ceased.

I really don't understand why there is this big deal about it - yes, there are people who are born that way. The bigger is why are we just ok with saying they were born that way? It's clearly a disorder in the brain - human sexuality is (religiously or evolutionarily, whichever you prefer) meant for procreation. A gay couple can't procreate so obviously there's a reason for that. Being gay is like having ADD - it's a mental disorder that changes the way the brain behaves. It's really just another disorder like all the others except rather than study it and realize how to correct this disorder we'd rather go around and say people are fine the way they are and deal with it otherwise you're a bigot. Speaking of... I find it rather intresting that the people who go around saying everyone should be equal and respected are, 99% of the time, the first ones to go around screaming "bigot" or "homophobe" just people someone disagrees with you on a social issue. It's quite a paradox...

A voice of reason amongst a sea of banality.

...Yes, one of many results of sex between members of the opposite sex can indeed be procreation, but to say it is the meaning of it is to loose sight of the fact that it can also build bonds and have social meaning too. After all, we're social apes.

Anal intercourse and reacharounds™ build bonds between those who enjoy that kind of thing. Don't try to give it a higher purpose.

My wife and I have chosen not to infest the world with more children. Do we have a brain disorder? Or did we choose to make a social commitment to have no children? Or are we just part of the excellent randomness of evolution that provides the world with a distribution of behaviors that may or may not have meaning? It's not really any different than the distribution of behavior in other species.

Infest? You lose all credibility there.

 

[7709876]

Yet rather than "treating me with dignity and respect", you call me a "sinner" because of the way I live my life.
I obey the ten commandments - not out of religious fear but because any half decent human can see they're pretty decent rules to live by, I pay vast amounts in tax, I am involved in and donate a lot to charity and cared for my grandfather, every day for two years up until the day he died, I don't lead an extravagant or promiscuous life, I don't gamble, take drugs. I don't believe there is one facet of my life that seeks to in any way hurt any other human being yet you would call me a sinner because I fell in love with and live with another man?

I am a sinner. We all are.

Are you really saying you are never guilty of anything sinful?

I think that you engaging in a sexual relationship with another man is sinful. It doesn't mean that I would discriminate against you or anyone else doing the same.

My father is married twice and divorced twice. He is currently in a relationship with a woman out of marriage. I disagree with this and consider it sinful - that doesn't mean I don't treat my father with respect.

 

[MrSmith]

My wife and I made the same choice.

I personally consider myself very fortunate for having avoided all that.

Do you realise how ridiculous you sound? You have no idea what you even avoided.

 

[Michael Goff]

"Born this way" is sort of vague, though "genetic" isn't right either, because obviously gay parents usually do not make gay kids (just 3-5%), and straight parents usually make straight kids (95-97%), but epigenetics is actually really difficult to understand for most people. Most people don't even know that 98% of human DNA is just non-coding junk, and just 2% makes up the important stuff about us.

Epigenetics ("above DNA") doesn't change your DNA, but it decides how much or whether some genes are expressed in different cells in your body. The study of epigenetics looks at what happens to your genes over the course of your life, and whether those changes could be passed down to your children or even your grandchildren.

If homosexuality isn't epigenetic, it has to be environmental, but either way it's kinda splitting hairs. It happens in-utero.

Point being, it's not a choice—it's only a choice whether or not someone hides it with shame and isn't allowed to be treated equally based on who they love. I mean, I don't see that as sustainable because of a personal religious belief. Which is exactly where ENDA comes into play.

Wasn't there one study that said that the chances of homosexuality raise the more a mother has male children, something about the body protecting itself against too much testosterone or something?

 

[ThunderSkunk]

My wife and I made the same choice.

I personally consider myself very fortunate for having avoided all that.

As have we.

Though we're considering adoption in a few years when the time is right.

No sense in making more people when there are so many that already exist being neglected.

 

[Michael Goff]

A voice of reason amongst a sea of banality.


Anal intercourse and reacharounds™ build bonds between those who enjoy that kind of thing. Don't try to give it a higher purpose.



Infest? You lose all credibility there.

A voice of reason to basically say "we used to do this ignorant thing, so obviously we had a reason"? We also used to perform lobotomies. Nowadays we know that it's a horrible thing. Society grows.

 

[distemp]

While it's a step forward, there are still too many loopholes for 'religious' institutions like major hospitals. And I doubt the house will act.

Isn't it funny how "religious" institutions will actually fight for their right to discriminate? If there was a Jesus, I have an odd feeling that he wouldn't be okay with that.

 

[AppleFan360]

Words cannot describe how ignorant your line of thought is.

You do realize you just proved his point?

The small minds in this thread amaze me. Obviously the demographic are on the young side. Ever wonder why many older people become less tolerant? Because they have been around a while and see the big picture. The more morality slips, the more chance that society will collapse. It's happened before and it will happen again. Read your history books folks and quit deluding yourself into thinking that it won't happen this time around.

 

[quagmire]

A voice of reason to basically say "we used to do this ignorant thing, so obviously we had a reason"? We also used to perform lobotomies. Nowadays we know that it's a horrible thing. Society grows.

And we thought electric shock therapy was ethical and we used to think it was perfectly ok to make people in a study believe they actually killed someone.

 

[distemp]

I know for a fact that if the D Senate simply did its job any of the last 4 years, and passed an annual federal budget bill and sent it for reconciliation, and passed the combined version, which it has not done, many of these other bills and nominations would sail through.

The fact the D Senate opts to hold up the entire federal budget process for several years in a row and rely entirely on continuing resolutions (CR), is not only unlawful, but a pure political play to keep the outsized "stimulus" spending going indefinitely.

It only takes 51 votes to pass a budget bill in the Senate unlike all others.

The bill Cook refers to and many others are being held up by a recalcitrant D Senate.

Besides, bills are supposed to start in the House. This is a PR trick exploiting an important constituency of the Democrats. I wonder how they feel about that!

Rocketman

So you're saying that the house is holding bills hostage because they aren't getting something they want. How disgusting.

 

[bandrews]

I am a sinner. We all are.

Are you really saying you never guilty of anything sinful?

Oh just go and put on a sack cloth vest and flail yourself. It all depends on your definition of sin. Yours seems to be "anything that makes you happy", mine is more along the lines of "anything that causes harm or distress to another human being".

 

[r.harris1]

Anal intercourse and reacharounds™ build bonds between those who enjoy that kind of thing. Don't try to give it a higher purpose.

No higher purpose intended. An example of another purpose, yes.

Infest? You lose all credibility there.

Oh deary me. Luckily I don't seek credibility here .

 

[citizenzen]

No sense in making more people when there are so many that already exist being neglected.

There's no shortage of people.

And right now ... is not a good time for making more.

 

[distemp]

Regarding slavery. God saw us all as servants. He put in place rules to treat slaves fairly including to set them free after a time. Treat them as you would want God to treat you since you belong to him as your slaves would belong to you. No two ways about this, slavery was not condemned in the bible.

About the food, this changed with Jesus death. We no longer need to look to the temple for what rules to obey. We go straight to God through Jesus so enjoy your bacon.

Regarding stoning, Jesus said "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Judgement belongs to god, not man. Let me point out though that judgement is not opinion. Letting someone know that what they are doing is wrong according to the bible, is not judging someone, it's making a statement. Stoning someone for what you think they did wrong would be casting judgement.

I'm always amazed at how pliable christian beliefs are. "Oh, people don't like slavery anymore...let's stretch the meaning a little so our teachings come off as slightly less abhorrent."

 

[Michael Goff]

You do realize you just proved his point?

The small minds in this thread amaze me. Obviously the demographic are on the young side. Ever wonder why many older people become less tolerant? Because they have been around a while and see the big picture. The more morality slips, the more chance that society will collapse. It's happened before and it will happen again. Read your history books folks and quit deluding yourself into thinking that it won't happen this time around.

Elderly people also have the highest % of racists. I suppose that's also because they have been around and have seen the bigger picture? Please, don't assume that all elderly people have some grasp on some higher knowledge. They were a product of their time just like we are. The current age just happens to be a little more liberal and forward thinking.

I will say it again, what he said was ignorant. He essentially said that just because we used to do something ignorant, we should always do it. There's no logic to that line of thinking. Society has grown, evolved, and become better in comparison to when the APA called homosexuality a mental disorder.

And we thought electric shock therapy was ethical and we used to think it was perfectly ok to make people in a study believe they actually killed someone.

Exactly.

Society grows, changes, learns, and evolves. It's why, if you look at history, you'll see that society has slowly become more and more progressive. We learn and grow.

----------

Regarding slavery. God saw us all as servants. He put in place rules to treat slaves fairly including to set them free after a time. Treat them as you would want God to treat you since you belong to him as your slaves would belong to you. No two ways about this, slavery was not condemned in the bible.

About the food, this changed with Jesus death. We no longer need to look to the temple for what rules to obey. We go straight to God through Jesus so enjoy your bacon.

Regarding stoning, Jesus said "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Judgement belongs to god, not man. Let me point out though that judgement is not opinion. Letting someone know that what they are doing is wrong according to the bible, is not judging someone, it's making a statement. Stoning someone for what you think they did wrong would be casting judgement.

Matthew 5;
17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19 Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.


Nope, he didn't change the laws of the prophets.

 

[Happybunny]

You do realize you just proved his point?

The small minds in this thread amaze me. Obviously the demographic are on the young side. Ever wonder why many older people become less tolerant? Because they have been around a while and see the big picture. The more morality slips, the more chance that society will collapse. It's happened before and it will happen again. Read your history books folks and quit deluding yourself into thinking that it won't happen this time around.

I for one cannot see the connection, are you saying that being gay is less moral behaviour?

 

[ThunderSkunk]

Anal intercourse and reacharounds™ build bonds between those who enjoy that kind of thing. Don't try to give it a higher purpose.

Infest? You lose all credibility there.

Read that again.


...and yes, you could say that a species so fixated on breeding that its population has exploded exponentially into the billions in just a couple centuries, and is such a huge population that it has to re-engineer the world it lives on, from the land, the sea, the food living on it, its predators, it's own physiology, whose short-term self-interest requires most other complex life to die off in extinction-event level numbers to support it, and which breeds more individuals while millions of its own species lay starving and dying along the way, is an infestation.

You could.

We don't, but if humanity were any other species developing this way, we'd certainly consider it a destructive infestation and control it.

 

[AppleFan360]

Society has grown, evolved, and become better in comparison to when the APA called homosexuality a mental disorder.

That's incredibly laughable and ignorant as well. Keep telling yourself that.