Apple Issues Statement in Support of Supreme Court Gay Marriage Rulings

[iSee]

Always great to hear. Trying to subjugate people by the ruling of a 2000 year old book is maddening.

Trying to force religious rules onto people that might not of that religion is maddening full stop.

True... I mean, the bible devotes a LOT more attention to eating pork than it does to homosexuality yet somehow there is nearly as much anti-bacon sentiment. (E.g., I have some Jewish friends that wouldn't be caught dead touching the stuff, but they don't seem to hold it against me that I eat it all the time.)

Actually, the anti-homosexuality references in the bible aren't that numerous and are debatable, at least to some degree. For one thing, Christians have a "new and everlasting covenant" which seems (to me) to override the old testament on this.

 

[shoulin333]

Once again our government thinks they know what is best for us. Why do we even vote if they are just going to overrule everything?

I don't care if we are talking about gay marriage or gun laws, just the fact that we have a voting process for a reason. If you live in a state where the majority votes for some law that you do not agree with you can get out.

 

[handsome pete]

If a judge wants to put a giant cross on the wall behind him, he has the right as an individual.

The Supreme Court might disagree.

 

[Digital Skunk]

So you'd have no problem if he put up a giant Buddhist statue in his courtroom? Or a Hindu statue? Or some Islamic calligraphy?

I have no problem with it, but I am open to most things though. I agree with you on true separation of church and state. No one will be happy one way or another, just take them all down . . . . . in state buildings.

 

[yg17]

Thats funny, an erection doesn't lie. Yep, I said it.

That's the head that never lies

 

[holmesf]

why is Apple even getting involved with this ?

Would have never happened had SJ been around. It is complete stupidity. Congrats Apple, great job.

Actually it did happen when Steve Jobs was around. See this story from 2008.

http://blog.sfgate.com/techchron/2008/10/24/apple-donates-100000-to-fight-prop-8/

 

[ConCat]

So you'd have no problem if he put up a giant Buddhist statue in his courtroom? Or a Hindu statue? Or some Islamic calligraphy?

Nope. He has the right.

 

[chrono1081]

True.

No worries I know what you're saying. Absolutes are always bad to use.

 

[ConCat]

The Supreme Court might disagree.

Well, they have the right to see this differently than me. I still hold by opinion.

 

[edk99]

No one is forcing your church to marry a gay couple. No church in the 12 states where it is legal are required to do so. There are plenty of churches, judges and civil servants out there who aren't bigots to perform the weddings.

Exactly! and the messiah has also spoken on this issue too.

President Obama, in his statement hailing the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, promised that he wouldn’t try to force religious institutions to conduct gay marriages.

“On an issue as sensitive as this, knowing that Americans hold a wide range of views based on deeply held beliefs, maintaining our nation’s commitment to religious freedom is also vital,” Obama said. “How religious institutions define and consecrate marriage has always been up to those institutions. Nothing about this decision — which applies only to civil marriages — changes that.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-i-wont-make-churches-conduct-gay-marriages/article/2532418

 

[shoulin333]

Yesterday, 5 individuals in black robes made it more difficult for minorities to vote by overriding an act of congress.

It's a sad day when SCOTUS takes away the rights of minorities.

Minorities have all the same rights in voting, they just no longer receive special treatment. If they want to be equal then they don't need any special laws that the rest of us don't have.

 

[skunk]

I don't need to. I know exactly what it is, and it's just as disgusting as the male circumcision. While that's said, if it's a strong belief in someone's religion that this should be done to their kids, they have the right. Will it negatively affect the child in the future? Perhaps, but we still don't have the right to take their religious freedom away from them. We accept male circumcision and consider it legal because it's a well-known practice among two major religions (Judaism and Islam), but that doesn't make it any different.

No, it does not make it any different. Both male and female genital mutilation should be banned. It is a barbaric, dangerous and primitive practice based entirely on tribalism and superstition, which is carried out without meaningful consent. Any religions which condone or encourage it should be made to shape up.

 

[chrono1081]

ok, ok. although I am pretty hyped up about the topic, I do sincerely apologize for offending people. I'll chill now.

There's no reason to be hyped up though.

Check this link out, it's not meant as an insult by any means it just happens to have the best list of how the ruling affects people:

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/a-30-second-guide-to-how-gay-marriage-ruling-affects-you/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=new+article&wa_ibsrc=fanpage

Most people are not affected by this ruling.

 

[laurim]

Please define what is "right". You can't. We all have our own beliefs. What's right to you is wrong to others. Don't be so arogant in thinking you are right on this issue.

How has this changed YOUR rights any? For the life of me, I just can't figure out why it's so important for people like you to punish gay people for being gay. It's just the most moronic thing I know of. Some people just need something to be upset about, whether it makes any sense or not.

 

[ConCat]

You should read some case law on that. You'd quickly find that you're very wrong.

It's what I believe. The supreme court and I may disagree, but so be it. We don't see eye to eye on many of their decisions.

 

[handsome pete]

Once again our government thinks they know what is best for us. Why do we even vote if they are just going to overrule everything?

I don't care if we are talking about gay marriage or gun laws, just the fact that we have a voting process for a reason. If you live in a state where the majority votes for some law that you do not agree with you can get out.

You don't understand how our system of government actually works, do you?

 

[Happybunny]

Daily Mail? LOL. I read The Guardian thank you.

Last time I checked I lived in a democracy with free speech. The gay lobby is always on the TV, marching through the streets and jumping on any bandwagon they can find to promote their views. And if you say anything against them suddenly you're homophobic or bigoted. No I just don't agree with them. I don't agree with gay marriage. Just my view.

You keep telling yourself that, over and over again, and maybe you'll believe it yourself in time.

But the cold hard facts remain judging by your posts, are you are a homophobe and a BIGOT.

 

[ResPublica]

Though I'm not really a supporter of gay marriage in general, I guess that discrimination by federal law between married couples is wrong and unconstitutional. That being sad, I think that gay people who want to live together should have the right for a partnership contract, but not for marriage. If you make marriage possible for both kinds of relationships, you"ll eventually get into a situation of redefining parenthood, like they are doing in France right now and have done in Belgium. Parenthood however is not solely a cultural thing but biological too. The state should not ignore that simple reality. Having a biological connection between parents and their children in a stabile marriage situation is simply something that can't exist for gay couples, making them fundamentally different. I don't want to break the bond that should exist between a child and his/her biological parents.

 

[flux73]

Apple really should keep their mouths shut on political issues, as should all businesses. Employees are free to have their opinions, but they need not project those opinions onto the brand.

The only time people say things like this are when they disagree with the outcome. Did you voice this same sentiment with equal passion when Chick-Fil-A released their statement?

See, I actually supported Chick-Fil-A's public stance against same-sex marriage. It is their right and because they are willing to take the financial consequences. Me, I never eat at Chick-Fil-A, but I still support their right to say whatever they like about political issues. I encourage it.

Apple knows full well that there will be people who won't buy their products because of their stance. So if they're willing to accept that, why shouldn't they say whatever they want?

 

[Digital Skunk]

Those people are bisexual or really in-between on the Kinsley scale. I can't choose. I'm just flat out not attracted to women.

You've already said something to clear this up, so I will keep it short.

Yes, there are some that are confused, but some in the LGBT community that I know made a choice, and actually hate it when folks say they aren't really L, G, B, or T.

Thats funny, an erection doesn't lie. Yep, I said it.

That's really a game-set-match right here folks.

I don't need to. I know exactly what it is, and it's just as disgusting as the male circumcision. While that's said, if it's a strong belief in someone's religion that this should be done to their kids, they have the right. Will it negatively affect the child in the future? Perhaps, but we still don't have the right to take their religious freedom away from them. We accept male circumcision and consider it legal because it's a well-known practice among two major religions (Judaism and Islam), but that doesn't make it any different.

Male circumcision is more of a cosmetic operation nowadays . . . or so I thought.

 

[zioxide]

Once again our government thinks they know what is best for us. Why do we even vote if they are just going to overrule everything?

I don't care if we are talking about gay marriage or gun laws, just the fact that we have a voting process for a reason. If you live in a state where the majority votes for some law that you do not agree with you can get out.

What part of "the majority can't vote to restrict the civil rights of the minority" do you not understand?

Do you seriously think you could put a question on the ballot as to whether black people should not be allowed to use the same facilities as white people?

What happens in 20 years when whites are the minority in this country? How would you feel if all the African-American and Latino-American voted to ban white people from doing something because of the color of their skin?

Though I'm not really a supporter of gay marriage in general, I guess that discrimination by federal law between married couples is wrong and unconstitutional. That being sad, I think that gay people who want to live together should have the right for a partnership contract, but not for marriage. If you make marriage possible for both kinds of relationships, you"ll eventually get into a situation of redefining parenthood, like they are doing in France right now and have done in Belgium. Parenthood however is not solely a cultural thing but biological too. The state should not ignore that simple reality. Having a biological connection between parents and their children in a stabile marriage situation is simply something that can't exist for gay couples, making them fundamentally different. I don't want to break the bond that should exist between a child and his/her biological parents.

So should adoption be illegal then?

 

[cmChimera]

I'm glad Apple support gay marriage, but what do they hope to achieve by announcing it?

I don't think they're trying to achieve anything. They're just happy. A lot of people are.

 

[GfPQqmcRKUvP]

Technically, you should neither make fun of him, dissuade him, or belittle his believes.

This is absurd. You have just cordoned off every possible way of meaningful communication. Social progress would be completely halted if people stopped trying to call out and dissuade bigoted behavior.

 

[slffl]

Apple really should keep their mouths shut on political issues, as should all businesses. Employees are free to have their opinions, but they need not project those opinions onto the brand.

Political? Like that slavery and women voting thing?

Good for Apple for publicly supporting human rights!

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Look at you people.

There isn't hardly a person left to scream at and yet you're still all screaming.

Learn how to take yes for an answer.