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

451–460 of 1001 posts

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#451

Post by dwild »

jzymbaluk wrote: post #383
dwild wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At first I didn't like the news. Tim Cook is gay, so what? I though 5 seconds about it and then I realized how actually we still need this... we still need to remind people that there's nothing wrong with being gay. That's sad that we are still at this point.

>that's sad that we're still at this point That said, public opinion is changing very rapidly. XKCD 1431 ( http://xkcd.com/1431/ ) offers an interesting visualization and comparison between gay marriage and interracial marriage. According to XKCD's source, interracial marriage didn't reach majority approval until 1995, while gay marriage already reached majority approval in 2011. Now obviously this rift could be the…

Considering it's from Randal, I guess we can trust this but to the eye, but it seems like the variation is really similar. The only real difference is that the US government doesn't help their cause where for interracial, they did way before majority. I don't know which is better but I don't believe rights should be dictated by popular opinions but by facts.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#452

Post by redthrowaway »

dayjah wrote: post #410
mklim wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I was in a similar boat. My first exposure to the term "lesbian" was a flash cartoon that had a throwaway gag about a butch woman who lived in the sewer and ate children—I remember going home and crying because I strongly suspected that that's what I was, once the other kids explained what the term meant, and I didn't want to end up having to move underground and away from all my friends once I grew up. (This…

> It's really good that young gay people to have so many prominent and positive role models now, Agree! Though as an avid sports fan, I'm disappointed in the sports world for not embracing this topic. With so many professional athletes odds are in favour of many a house hold name being gay, yet there are only a small handful of sports people that are openly gay. It is inspiring that Tim Cook has done this, and I real…

YCP[1] is doing a lot to help reduce barriers in the sports world, and has had a lot of big-name athletes come out in support of them (although not, to my knowledge, actually coming out--yet)

[1] http://youcanplayproject.org/

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#453

Post by tommorris »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #140
DanBC wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where the homesexual agenda in Disney movies? I'd prefer specific examples rather than just handwavey nonsense.

Frozen. Had a Swedish guy (shop owner) living with another guy and they both had a bunch of kids. Described the other guy and kids as his "family." See point #5 in this article's list: http://mic.com/articles/79455/7-moments-that-made-frozen-the...

I don't really watch Disney movies, but I do know that the Frozen soundtrack is the only Disney music I've ever heard playing in a London gay bar.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#454

Post by courtf »

wtbob wrote: post #256
chrisBob wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that there are specific protections for things like age, race and religion, but not sexual orientation. I consider orientation, like race, to be something that you are born with that deserves the same protections.

Of course, there's a huge difference between orientation and behaviour. One can't help how one's born, but one can help how one behaves.

There are certainly contexts where this is a valuable sentiment, but separating sexual orientation from sexual behavior at such a gross level (ie, all not engaging in same-sex behavior at all) is simply crude and unnecessary. To each their own, but your statement seems to imply that gays should struggle against what is ultimately a harmless and very human attraction.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#455

Post by general_failure »

stephenr wrote: post #193
general_failure wrote: post #171

While this is already known, this does show us the world is not black and white. Tricky the whole thing. Mozilla as a company fights for privacy and creates a lot of free software for the general good. But people couldn't stand it's CEO being anti-gay. Now we have the most dangerous (imo) company of all time whose CEO is gay. Ah, good times.

The most dangerous company of all time?

Yes, dangerous because of it's reach. I am not very excited to live in a walled garden. A massive one as that.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#456

Post by cookiecaper »

aragot wrote: post #206
kshatrea wrote: post #53

This made me well up inside. Being from a country that considers homosexuality to be illegal (India) and having a close friend who left that country as well as his religion (Islam) solely due to being gay, I applaud this man's spirit. It is not only the government that must accept equality of different ways, but so must society. Religion, culture and political climates are no reason to deny fundamental human freedoms…

Tim Cook faces 2 years in jail in Singapore if he has activity even in a private room. Three days ago, the Court of Appeal has just judged the law was conform to the constitution, because everyone is guaranteed equal rights no matter their sex, race or religion, and this doesn't include sexuality. The Straits Times: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/stor... The original judgement: https://s3.ama…

Performing a sexual act is a conscious behavior, wilfully chosen by the participants (except in cases of rape, which is not relevant to this discussion). Law is meant to regulate behaviors. It's valid to make sexual acts illegal. It doesn't violate non-discrimination rights because wilful participation by any person is just as illegal as participation by any other person. Laws that say "this is legal for people with this involuntary attribute but illegal for people with a different involuntary attribute" are discriminatory. If they say "sexual activity with a person of the same sex is illegal", it's equally illegal for everyone, regardless of that person's unchangeable, involuntarily physical attributes. Saying some people can do something (like "only white people can engage in sexual activity with a person of the same sex") while others can't is discriminatory. Making something illegal for everyone is not. It's just normal lawmaking.

We may disagree with Singapore and think that most sexual acts shouldn't be illegal. But how can we go around saying law can't regulate behavior? This is one of my big problems with the gay "rights" lobby of today -- they're trying to make it illegal to legislate basically anything. If you disagree with the law, change the law, don't codify sweeping generalizations that set a precedent of "I was born this way and I can't control it" as an excuse for any illegal behavior.

Only the most basic principles are protected by things like the American Bill of Rights, and the specific behavior must be tested by the courts to see if it conforms to the principles enshrined as fundamental rights.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#457

Post by jshevek »

notjackma wrote: post #396
angersock wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eich participated in a public system in an approved way at a political level, did so without letting his politics get in the way of his personal or professional life, and made functional programming ubiquitous. There's nothing wrong with what he did given that he didn't let that view (in the abstract) color his personal interactions. And, let us note, it's all speculation on this point as to what or why he did it, be…

> Tim Cook continued contracts with Foxconn with the sole goal of minimizing production costs by using underpaid overworked labor I'm going to upvote you for this. Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. He seems quite happy in promoting brutal Victorian style work-houses because it's "over there". Out of sight, out of mind. He's quite the hypocrite. He's also no better or worse then the operatio…

> Just because Tim Cook is gay doesn't make him Mother Teresa. He seems quite happy in promoting brutal Victorian style work-houses because it's "over there". Out of sight, out of mind.

Yes, yes, and yes.

Many of my more naive, young gay friends and acquaintances actually DO seem to think that 'being a powerful gay person', onto itself, makes him worthy of worship.

> He's quite the hypocrite.

Did he actually say that its wrong to promote brutal Victorian style work-houses?

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#458

Post by davesque »

linguafranca wrote: post #364
GuiA wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, you will possibly be downvoted, but not because your opinion dissents with the majority. There are plenty of dissenting opinions on HN who get upvoted to the top, as long as they're well argued and informed. You will be downvoted because your comment has no substance to it. The only claim you make is "we know that homosexuality is a destructive force in society", and it isn't backed up by any meaningful conversa…

Quoting the comment guidelines: The test for substance is a lot like it is for links. Does your comment teach us anything? There are two ways to do that: by pointing out some consideration that hadn't previously been mentioned, and by giving more information about the topic, perhaps from personal experience. Whereas comments like "LOL!" or worse still, "That's retarded!" teach us nothing. I do believe simply offering…

1) "by pointing out some consideration that hadn't previously been mentioned"

The only thing we're led to consider is that you have a dissenting opinion. That doesn't contribute much to the discussion. If you talk a bit about your reasons for having your opinion, it might fit this guideline more clearly.

2) "by giving more information about the topic, perhaps from personal experience"

Again, you haven't given us any more information about the topic. The only new information we have is that you are part of a group that knows "that homosexuality is a destructive force in society." That assertion alone isn't going to convince anyone that you're onto something.

Something else to consider, which should be obvious, is that this issue is an extremely charged subject. Because of that, it's especially important to talk about your reasons for having your opinion. Otherwise, people are going to immediately dismiss it.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#460

Post by millstone »

alexbecker wrote: post #449
ForrestN wrote: post #235

I am incredibly grateful to Cook for this, not least because of how it will affect young gay people. When I was a child, I felt generally good about myself. I was reasonably smart, well-spoken, curious, and so on, and I wanted to do something important with my life. Some nagging part of me suspected I was gay from very early on, but I resisted it intensely. I wasn't really afraid of being mistreated, although I proba…

I'm not sure Apple is "the most admirable company", or even in the running.

Well, they are! http://fortune.com/worlds-most-admired-companies/
Post reply on HN