Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tim Cook Speaks Up

businessweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#311

Post by stephencanon »

socialist_coder wrote: post #126
praptak wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it came across as purely figurative. IMHO the usual phrases like "thank God it's not raining" are pretty much detached from the religious context. Is it different in US?

"Thank God it's not raining" is completely different from saying "... the greatest gifts God has given me." The first is just a frivolous small talk type comment. Non-religious people would say this. It's part of the common US vocabulary. The second is much more serious, and the speaker is actually thanking God for how he is. A non-religious person would never say it. Religious people do this type of thing all the ti…

> The amount of American pro-athletes who are religious is astounding. Many athletes will seriously thank God after doing something well in a sporting event.

This is just a very clever thought pattern to confirm the American mythos of the self-made man and avoid giving credit to teammates, coaches, etc. "God made me great" is a way to take credit for yourself while maintaining the appearance of humility (no one can really call you out on it, either, because it's just your religion). Politicians use it all the time too.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#312

Post by danielweber »

mkr-hn wrote: post #307
danielweber wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe he listened to NPR two weeks earlier and heard Melissa Block say on the air that Tim Cook was openly gay. http://www.npr.org/2014/06/13/321778926/letters-the-world-cu...

Outed is not the same as out.

If you heard the regular personality on NPR's "Here And Now" say that someone was openly gay, you would assume he was out.

That's where I learned it. I didn't know for a few weeks later that it was supposed to be a secret we didn't say.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#313

Post by venomsnake »

super_mario wrote: post #184
uid wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are certainly converging ever closer to the truth. What the pope said last week isn't a new position - the Catholic church and evolution have never been in conflict. There was no position for a long time while Catholic scientists worked on evolution, but it was formally accepted in 1950, which in terms of the Catholic church moving on an issue is pretty quick.

No, it isn't a new position, but let's not pretend like Catholic church has accepted evolution either. Catholic church still believes in theistic evolution, i.e. evolution where god must interfere at critical times and not in unguided evolution though natural selection, which is the actual scientific theory. Theistic evolution is not evolution and it is in principle unscientific. If you really care to find out what C…

Actually absolutely nothing contradicts the idea of evolution with the concept of earth being slightly bigger dish seeded with life.

After all we do the same on small scale every time we bake.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#314

Post by facepalm »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #278
wtbob wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is enforcing legal restrictions against a minority class of people not inherently discriminatory? That's begging the question: you're assuming that failure to recognise a homosexual relationship is a legal restriction, which really doesn't make sense. I can declare myself King of England, no-one in America will recognise me as such, but that doesn't impose any legal restriction on me. There's the side issue of…

That's a cool view, but not how it works. The 'side issue' you dismiss is really the center of it: the government denies full participation to a class of people based on a questionable moral stance. Anything less that recognition is a 'back of the bus' argument: if the bus goes to the same place, why do you care if you have to sit in the back?

Sorry, I have to write a second reply because it really makes me think: what would a possible moral stance against gay marriage even be? I can't imagine a reasonable moral argument against gay marriage? Unless you think homosexuals being together is immoral, but then marriage would be irrelevant (if that was somebody's opinion, they would probably fight on a lower level, like putting gays into jail or whatever, not prevent them from marrying)?

I'm not really well versed in the typical pro and contra arguments, so this made me curious.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#315

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

daughart wrote: post #280
worklogin wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't you? Whether it's good or not, aren't you pushing homosexuality on everyone, saying, "It's not OK to disapprove of our lifestyle"?

People don't call civil rights or women's rights "agendas," they call them "movements." Agenda is pejorative, pertaining to "underlying intentions"; whereas movement directly refers to the act of changing, and in other fields such as music indicates a progression or forward dynamic. Portraying gay people in media could have an advertising "agenda" (e.g. they have an intention of selling things by appearing gay friend…

"People don't call civil rights or women's rights "agendas,""

Sure they do, but they also use terms like "feminazi" and "race realism".

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#316

Post by JoeAltmaier »

stephencanon wrote: post #311
socialist_coder wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Thank God it's not raining" is completely different from saying "... the greatest gifts God has given me." The first is just a frivolous small talk type comment. Non-religious people would say this. It's part of the common US vocabulary. The second is much more serious, and the speaker is actually thanking God for how he is. A non-religious person would never say it. Religious people do this type of thing all the ti…

> The amount of American pro-athletes who are religious is astounding. Many athletes will seriously thank God after doing something well in a sporting event. This is just a very clever thought pattern to confirm the American mythos of the self-made man and avoid giving credit to teammates, coaches, etc. "God made me great" is a way to take credit for yourself while maintaining the appearance of humility (no one can r…

Is it necessary to dismiss belief as somehow self-serving? A bragging athlete is arrogant; a humble one is secretly scheming to take credit. How do you win in that world-view?

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#317

Post by Bpit »

lentil_soup wrote: post #151
vegardx wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to have been a cultural shift in the United States as of lately. Just a few years back most companies was afraid of "choosing" side, and kept things pretty neutral. But look at recent Disney movies and Coca-Cola commercials. They all give the impression that from a marketing perspective it's better to take a stand.

I don't have any data to back it up, but I guess it's just companies following the trend on public opinion? They didn't before because the majority was against it, they do now because the majority is for it. Not sure if that means taking a stand, though.

They probably analysed it from a business perspective and thought it makes sense. Fine for me as long it's for the right cause.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#318

Post by Bpit »

lentil_soup wrote: post #151
vegardx wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to have been a cultural shift in the United States as of lately. Just a few years back most companies was afraid of "choosing" side, and kept things pretty neutral. But look at recent Disney movies and Coca-Cola commercials. They all give the impression that from a marketing perspective it's better to take a stand.

I don't have any data to back it up, but I guess it's just companies following the trend on public opinion? They didn't before because the majority was against it, they do now because the majority is for it. Not sure if that means taking a stand, though.

They probably analysed it from a business perspective and thought it makes sense. Fine for me as long it's for the right cause.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#319

Post by _pmf_ »

meowface wrote: post #127
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Assuming you're talking about in the Western world) Do you not see a difference between being gay and being white? Really? Is it not obvious that one group has been historically repressed, attacked, discriminated against, etc. by its 'counter group', whilst the other has been the oppressor? These are about the most simplistic facts in social history, so I find it very difficult to believe you unaware of them; it see…

I actually think he makes a reasonable point, if you read his last sentence carefully. Realistically, it doesn't make much sense to be "proud" of being gay, just like it doesn't make sense to be "proud" of being white. It makes sense to be proud for staying strong in the face of discrimination and hate speech, but being gay itself is not worthy of any pride.

> It makes sense to be proud for staying strong in the face of discrimination and hate speech, but being gay itself is not worthy of any pride.

Exactly. If you are an aging gay man who has experienced repression and discrimination and lived your life to the fullest in spite of these challenges, you can be proud.

If you are a rich white man in Silicon Valley who happens to be gay, well ... hooray for you, I guess.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#320

Post by mkr-hn »

danielweber wrote: post #312
mkr-hn wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outed is not the same as out.

If you heard the regular personality on NPR's "Here And Now" say that someone was openly gay, you would assume he was out. That's where I learned it. I didn't know for a few weeks later that it was supposed to be a secret we didn't say.

I would wonder why I'd never heard it right from the only person qualified to say, find that he hadn't said it, and doubt the credibility of the person who reported it as true. But I also know what it's like to be afraid of being outed to people you're not out to, so maybe it's different if you don't have that fear.
Post reply on HN