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

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#661

Post by notahacker »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #641
notahacker wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean like the bits about the "great gift" of holy matrimony and God's intention "man and wife" to be joined "as one flesh" that crop up at basically every single Christian wedding?

So are you're saying that expressing the Christian view that God intends for men and women to only have sexual relationships within [a heterosexual] marriage, that such marriage should be the basis under which children are raised, that marriage should be a singular unending union, expressing such things won't cause one to be vilified, on HN say? The evidence seems to be against you.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest there probably isn't one person posting on HN that has ever interrupted a wedding to complain that all the man and wife stuff is a bit heterosexist.

Surprisingly, HN - atheists included - is both capable of celebrating people's happiness when they express views on the amazing "god-given" nature of their romantic relationships, like Tim Cook did, and disapproving of people making statements to the effect that other people's romantic relationships are wrong, like Tim Cook didn't.

Equating the two is a desperately poor excuse for an argument.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#662

Post by return0 »

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…

> I pray for the day that this is not true.

To whom? lol

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#663

Post by jshevek »

sarciszewski wrote: post #647
mwfunk wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you admire someone, then by definition you consider them admirable. So, lots and lots of people consider them admirable. You may not, but that doesn't mean that other people can't have different opinions. It also doesn't mean they're wrong and you're right or vice versa, since we're all unreliable narrators of the world around us.

Here, I'll translate: Admirable is a moral judgment. Admired means that "the others" have drank the kool-aid. (Sheeple, etc. etc.)

Do you consider Nike admirable? Would you eagerly link 'evidence' trying to prove that Nike is one of the most 'admirable' companies out there?

If yes, well... okay then. I don't understand you, and I'll stop here.

If no, then maybe you can see how maybe you've not fairly contextualized the conversation? This list of 'admired' companies does, indeed, completely miss the original posters point.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#664

Post by srean »

vayarajesh wrote: post #648
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…

India is far from been mature and accept for what we actually are.. in India you will mostly see people who are pretentious and care more about society thinks about them than what they actually feel.. Same is the case for a treatment for "women".. in india they are treated unequally.. the boy child gets all the care, education, preferences and most of all "FREEDOM" and girl cant even do anything of her choice.. india…

> girl cant even do anything of her choice

This varies by region and sometimes quite drastically so. In India you do have matriarchal societies, although only in pockets. If a woman walks into a beer shop in Delhi and takes a swig, chances are high that it would attract some unpleasantness. If the same plays out in Kohima or Shillong ... people there couldnt care less. That aside, intrusion into women's freedom follows the same gradient as that of which century the region lives by.

On the rest, couldnt agree more even if I tried.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#665

Post by jackmaney »

hnal943 wrote: post #628
jackmaney wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eich didn't just "have an unpopular opinion", he actively contributed against civil rights for LGBT people. He is part of a dying breed, and he cannot possibly fade into obscurity quickly enough.

He held the same position that Obama did at the time.

And yet, Obama didn't take action against the civil rights of LGBT people, did he?

Do you hear that sound? That's the point whooshing majestically over your head.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#666

Post by jshevek »

rpearl wrote: post #604
jshevek wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Several statements he made in this post seemed weirdly manipulative to me, and that was one of them. I mean, its great that he chooses and advocates the view that homosexuality can be a 'gift'. That it can be a positive thing! Props for that! But the phrasing...does he really believe that the imaginary being he worships chose for him to be gay? Like the creator of the universe is really sitting there saying "oh, I'll…

What you might call "understanding the universe", seeing how it works, the mechanisms by which conscious experience happens... a religious person might call that "knowing god" and both of these are reasonable views of the same whole, just taken from opposite sides.

I don't understand how your comment relates to mine.

Are you saying that if someone wants to "know god", they are likely to conclude that god does, indeed, sit around saying "This one is gonna be gay! and this one will be straight!"?

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#667

Post by rpearl »

downandout wrote: post #632
rpearl wrote: post #612

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please read the other part of my comment, wherein I claim that he does not have a right to suppress rights . The context is extremely important: totally uncritical tolerance is not useful to society, and erodes tolerance. We need to be able to defend society against intolerance in order to maintain tolerance. You cannot divorce the actual issue he is expressing his opinion on from the fact that he is expressing an op…

You cannot divorce the actual issue he is expressing his opinion on from the fact that he is expressing an opinion. Of course you can. In fact this is one of the fundamental tenets of our entire political system. There are no carved out exceptions suspending constitutional protections for really bad opinions. We have a framework through which people with strong conflicting opinions can air them without fear of certai…

It is not at all one of the fundamental tenets of our political system. You have to take social context into consideration when generating social laws. People in oppressed and minority groups need more help because they are starting from a position of less privilege. And this is what we do: Laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 exist solely to protect the rights of people who are being oppressed and to restrict the rights of people doing the oppressing. Society acted to defend against intolerance, by being more intolerant of intolerant people.

The basic slippery slope you envision is "if we restrict rights, from what principle do we decide where to stop doing that?" The fault in the argument is that it is totally reasonable to not tolerate intolerance, and again, uncritical tolerance is not what we desire here, but rather tolerance of viewpoints which are not intolerant.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#668

Post by enlightenedfool »

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…

Social change at this scale takes a long time. really long spanning life times. There are precedents like women voting rights, segregation etc. It's easy to criticize taking a snapshot. There's no easy and quick solution. Haven't you heard how people that said earth is not the center of universe were mocked and even killed? The society will get there eventually. In India, I guess we won't live long enough to see that.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#669

Post by fuligo »

downandout wrote: post #530
Tloewald wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

His resignation was not celebrated here as I recall. Many found it regrettable (and rightly so in my opinion) that he was nominated for the position in the first place, considering what a symbolic figure the CEO of a foundation is.

But it was always recognized the culprit in this case was the board of directors who put him in this position, only to retract their support later.

Eich is a brilliant technologist, and that should simply have been his role. Becoming the chief brand embassador was never an appropriate choice.

I also don't get how you can equate this with a hypothetical where he is extremely liberal and is being attacked by conservatives. Supporting discriminatory laws is not even on the same plane as being "offensively" open-minded.

Re: Tim Cook Speaks Up

#670

Post by Wintamute »

"I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me."

I'm 100% behind this, it's a great article with a great motive but this struck me as a curious note. What do you think he's getting at?

Post reply on HN