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

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#521

Post by thisisdallas »

anonbanker wrote: post #483
blktiger wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a hard time thinking of anyone as Christian if they ignore the basic tenants of what the Bible says. Homosexuality is very clearly spelled out as wrong. So are plenty of other things of course and the Bible doesn't specify homosexual behavior as any more or less wrong than any other sinful act. Christians shouldn't be treating homosexuals any different than anyone else, but that includes letting people know th…

in Leviticus 18:25, Man laying with another Man is an "abomination". right before that, in Leviticus 18:19, "'Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period." and right before that, in Leviticus 17:15, "'Anyone, whether native-born or foreigner, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be ceremoniall…

>That Cotton-Polyester blend you're wearing? You might as well be having gay sex, as far as The LORD is concerned.

That's a pretty intense bastardization of biblical theology. It's fun to snicker and say things like that but your logical gymnastics are quite embarrassing to those who understand the correlation between Christ, the Old Testament, and covenant theology.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#522

Post by unknownBits »

alexbecker wrote: post #484
unknownBits wrote: post #470

I am hetero, and I always asked myself: why all that fuzz about people being gay or anything else. I don't need to be proud to be gay or hetero or whatever, I just don't get it.. I have gay friends and never had anything against people with other sexuality, but I truly hate the Gay Pride in our country. I think it is pathetic to be proud of your sexual orientation and feeling a need to show that off. This will defini…

I know this is bait, but I'll bite. > I truly hate the Gay Pride in our country. I think it is pathetic to be proud of your sexual orientation and feeling a need to show that off. The notion of "Gay Pride" exists to specifically counter the widespread notion that being gay is something to be ashamed of. Countering shame with pride is way more effective than countering it with "meh, it's not relevant to my identity".…

There must be more intelligent ways to gain acceptance for being gay than a gay pride, sorry but it's so lame, ever seen the pictures? The gay friends I have are nothing like that, most of them are very intelligent, sensible, and nothing like those idiot on those parades.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#523

Post by yourad_io »

avinassh wrote: post #475

Excellent news. I am from India where being gay is a crime in this country. Leaders of this country believe that being gay is a disease and it can be 'cured'[0]. According to Indian Penal Code 377[1], if you are gay you can be imprisoned for life. I had a friend and two years ago he committed suicide because he was gay. In India it's not easy to be gay. Parents and societal pressures can make anyones life living hell…

Articles like these make me sympathize with Bond-style supervillains. :(

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#524

Post by awinder »

notjackma wrote: post #418
dragonwriter wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 52% of Californians voted in favor of Prop 8 (to ban same-sex marriage) No, they didn't. 52% of those who voted on Prop 8 (about 79% of the ~17M eligible and registered to vote, which were themselves only about 45% of Californians) voted for Prop 8 -- so about 19% of Californians voted for it. > so you could argue Brendan Eich holds a rather popular opinion. Well, no, you couldn't make a good argument that he holds…

Semantics. The fact is, of registered voters in California, more people voted against same-sex marriage than for it. Of course, that was 6 years ago... so why should Brendan Eich be ostracised in 2014 for donating money to a campaign which was quite popular back then? At what point did Mozilla's mission for a free and open internet turn into one about social justice and identity politics?

Lots of people get ostracized for supporting and pushing things that were once popular but became massively unpopular, all throughout history. McCarthy advocated and pushed a very, very popular agenda for it's time, but history isn't written in the perspective of it's time, it's written in the perspective of today. It was also never "quite popular", it was essentially a split decision, and has been a very contentious issue for quite a while. It also doesn't take a genius to realize the trajectory of any social rights issue in this country, so I have a hard time feeling any empathy for what happened to Eich. Believe what you want, but if you want to be a popular leader, you've gotta have the intelligence and foresight to realize what kinds of things are bound to get you into trouble one day. And if he realized that and still believed in the cause so much, then there are no real victims, just choices and ramifications.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#525

Post by steven2012 »

This was pretty well known ever since Tim Cook took reins as CEO. I think Felix Salmon "outed" him at the time, although I don't think Tim Cook ever hid it, or was ashamed in any respect. He, however, never addressed it publicly until now.

It's great that he has gone on record to officially address this. I'm curious though if there will be any repercussions from much less tolerant countries around the world. Hopefully not, and hopefully this opens up a new era of acceptance, although some countries that outlaw homosexuality might do stupid things. Thank goodness they are small and insignificant for the most part, although the reaction from countries like China and Indonesia worry me.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#526

Post by lotsofmangos »

blktiger wrote: post #298
dodyg wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tim Cook is a Christian. This is a message to the Church.

I have a hard time thinking of anyone as Christian if they ignore the basic tenants of what the Bible says. Homosexuality is very clearly spelled out as wrong. So are plenty of other things of course and the Bible doesn't specify homosexual behavior as any more or less wrong than any other sinful act. Christians shouldn't be treating homosexuals any different than anyone else, but that includes letting people know th…

Drawing pictures of things god has made and especially using them religiously is spelled out very clearly as wrong, repeatedly and at length, but the Christians often represent themselves with drawings of a fish and keep drawing pictures of Jesus simply everywhere:

"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."

However you can rape the wives of your defeated enemies after battle, which the vast majority of Christians would find horrifying:

"When you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives,

if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife.

Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails

and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month, then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife.

If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her."

There's a lot of basic tenets of the bible that Christians ignore. Wearing mixed fibers, eating shellfish, donkeys and oxen co-working in agriculture.

If you go by basic tenets of the bible, most Christians don't seem to even know what they all are, let alone follow them.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#527

Post by jshevek »

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…

Edit: Woah, my mistake! I thought you were responding to my statement above. My apologies. What is the etiquette on HN for this? Is it editing out my comment, which, given my misunderstanding of the context, is irrelevant to your statement?

[ Did you read (critically) the comment I was responding to?

I mostly agree with your statement, except for the implication you may be making that agenda always has this pejorative meaning. It simply doesn't. If you want to understand people, you should not assume that it always does. And we should not police people for choosing to bring the non-pejorative acknowledgement of the fact that groups have purposes and goals.

If LGBT groups did not have agendas, they would not be worth supporting. ]

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#528

Post by michaelsbradley »

kyrra wrote: post #262
wmt wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything about any Gods hating gays. Levictus compares men having sex with other men being as big of a sin as cursing your parents or having sex with a woman during her periods, and later in Sodom God decides to murder a town for their lack of charity. I guess you could reach and say that God hates sinners and homosexuals are committing a sin, but that's pretty silly at least in Christianity everyone is a…

(This is from my understanding of this, which is pretty limited) I think this is an important point about Christianity and homosexuality. While the bible states homosexuality is a sin, it says a lot of things are sins. But it doesn't have some scale of REALLY BAD sins vs tiny sins. Sins are sins when it comes to Christianity. And the only way to salvation is through Jesus. A church that would reject members based on…

Sacred Scripture does, in fact, have a scale of "really bad" sins.

For more information, look into the seven deadly sins[1], sins that cry to heaven for vengeance and sins against the Holy Spirit[2].

There is also a passage in one of the epistles of the Apostle St. John:

"If a man knows his brother to be guilty, yet not of such a sin as brings death with it, he should pray for him; and, at his request, life will be granted to the brother who is sinning, yet not fatally. There is a sin which kills; it is not over this that I bid him fall to prayer. Sin may be wrong-doing of any kind; not all sin is fatal." (1 John 5:16-17)[3]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_deadly_sins

[2] http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/what-are-sins-that-cr...

[3] http://www.newadvent.org/bible/1jo005.htm

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#529

Post by yourad_io »

Kalium wrote: post #520
yourad_io wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you are made to feel unwanted, excluded, and otherwise not welcome it is natural to go elsewhere in search of inclusiveness. Sure, but the GP wasn't talking about a particular group rejecting them, but rather "stop sympathizing with the entire modern feminist movement". That's an extreme reaction to disliking a subset of the movement's followers. > This is a far more common reaction than that of adopting sympa…

When a person's entire exposure to a group consists wholly of a few bad members, they are likely to figure that sample representative. They are not likely to keep re-sampling until they find a desirable sample. It's irrational to expect otherwise. Why do you expect otherwise? Why do you feel compelled to couple it with insults?

> When a person's entire exposure to a group consists wholly of a few bad members, they are likely to figure that sample representative.

But Feminism isn't a group; it is an idea. If some of the followers misbehave, you should still be able to believe and support in the idea.

To me, supporting ideas only when you "like" the (majority of?) people supporting them is akin to supporting free speech but only for the positions that you believe in.

(edit)

> Why do you feel compelled to couple it with insults?

I'm not sure where you're reading that. The "You" at the end was directed at the fictional person that I'm attempting to emulate with the 1/2/3 reasoning, not you.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#530

Post by downandout »

Tloewald wrote: post #378
angersock wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Now if only we could remind people that there's nothing wrong with having an unpopular opinion. After all, Brendan Eich has done more for computing than Cook ever will.

Brendan Eich is entitled to his opinion, and a large not for profit is entitled not to want someone with that opinion as a figurehead. As for who has done more for what — web browsers were going to have a scripting language. Is Javascript so astoundingly good that we can only assume any alternative would have been worse?

I don't believe in the cause that Eich donated to. But taking away someone's job over a political donation is preposterous and disturbing. If he had donated to a liberal cause and was forced out because conservative employees had a problem with it, the entire media would have come down on Mozilla like a ton of bricks. Instead his resignation was celebrated.

Chilling political discourse by threatening the livelihoods of those you disagree with is a threat to democracy itself and should not ever be allowed to happen. Eich's forced resignation was an offense against everything America allegedly stands for.

Post reply on HN