Disclaimer: The following post contains politics and strong opinions. You have been warned.
In a rare move, Apple has thrown its hat into the political ring. A post on the company’s Hot News page says that Apple is publicly opposing California’s Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that would change the California State Constitution to define the union between a man and woman as the only valid form of marriage in the state and banning marriage for same-sex couples. The proposition appears on the ballot for California’s upcoming November 4th election.
Not only is Apple opposing Prop 8, it’s also putting its money where its mouth is, donating $100,000 to the “No on 8” campaign, and citing its history as one of the first California companies to offer equal benefits to its employees’ same-sex partners. Says Apple:
…we strongly believe that a person’s fundamental rights — including the right to marry — should not be affected by their sexual orientation. Apple views this as a civil rights issue, rather than just a political issue, and is therefore speaking out publicly against Proposition 8.
Apple’s not alone either, as the LA Times reports that Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page have also donated a substantial amount of money to the “No on 8” campaign.
Dan’s Opinion: I could not be happier to see my favorite company take up my favorite cause. Apple sometimes takes flak for not involving itself in charitable and social issues, so it’s refreshing to see them put their foot down—and hard—on something so crucial to so many Americans. As a resident of the U.S.’s first state to allow same-sex couples the right to marry, I couldn’t be prouder to see Apple take up this issue of fundamental human rights and equality. Kudos to Apple and to Steve.
If one has nothing nice to say, say nothing
E.T.Cook's Opinion:
Hrm. In this day and age, homosexual rights are your favorite cause? Really?
World hunger. War. Despotism. Sex Slavery. Genocide. Economy, etc...and homosexual rights is your favorite cause?
Yeah. In America...we definitely have our priorities backwards.
@E.T. Cook: Equal rights for all people? Yeah, it is.
"Apple views this as a civil rights issue, rather than just a political issue"?
B.S.!
Is that going to be the excuse for pissing off their customers who may be against it for whatever reason? Wow.
Martino, I'm sure Apple knows its risks in doing this. Also its rewards.
While I personally am in favor of Prop 8, what I find most unfortunate is that Apple, a technology company, feels it MUST get involved in a socio-political issue and to the tune of $100k while they insist on overcharging for their products. If they want to toss some coin to world hunger, fighting diseases, children's hospitals, etc., that's all fine and good, but I cannot see taking a stand on an issue that divides a country and might alienate some customers. I don't think most people see this as a civil rights issue, and if I were black, I would be deeply offended by people who try to link all of this to the Civil Rights Movement.
Yes, the state that has ignored the law and let the judiciary legislate from the bench. What a great example CA has been. Everyone in this country has the same "right" regarding marrige - marry somebody of the opposite sex. This has nothing to do with rights. Redefining the institution of marriage from one man/one woman opens the door to defining it for anything. People will attack that notion, but it's true. What about Mormons - won't they now say that we should honor multiple wife marriages? What about crazy people who love their animals more than people - can't we marry our pets? It's like saying we want to redefine what the words white and black mean (in terms of the color).
I'm sort of amazed that anyone can NOT see the connection between this and the civil rights movement. Loving v. Virgina, anyone?
@Dan
I love the Ameri-centric view that equivocates homosexual rights with human rights.
Those Fallon Gong that are getting their organs harvested have somehow been put on the same plane of "human rights" as homosexual rights. Really?
And we wonder why the world laughs at us. We have managed to make trite all worldly struggles.
Very good Dan! You are a winner!
Quote: "World hunger. War. Despotism. Sex Slavery. Genocide. Economy, etc...and homosexual rights is your favorite cause?"
Agreed, although I'd add legalized abortion, terrorism, African AIDS orphans, Russia becoming nasty again, famine in parts of Africa, and Iran's near nuclear status, among others.
No one at Apple Corporate is still in the womb. No one there has to fret that their 12-year-old daughter will be kidnapped and sold into sexual slavery. None are poor and African. None live in the countries bordering Russia. None are in range of Iran's nukes. None fret about where their next meal will come from. So what did you expect?
Some large corporations are just flaky, self-focused, greedy, and shallow. And don't forget that none of the victims I've listed above are important Apple customers. Homosexuals are. This is money talking to money. Nothing more, nothing less.
It reminds me of Apple's "Think Different" campaign which, in the US, included the Tibetan Dalai Lama. In Apple's campaign in Chinese Hong Kong, I'm told, the Dalai Lama was no where to be seen. "Think Different Except When It Costs Us Money."
Google's much the same. They helped China censor the Internet in the world's most populous country. Their real motto is: "Don't Be Evil Except When It Makes Us Money."
Dave, I just think companies/organizations that pretend to offer their services to all should not take a stand on anything that does not directly affect the company. The people within them are free to think, converse, or donate as they wish of course. But I think that clear line needs to be drawn. Professional and personal. As an Apple consumer, this really angers me and no, my opinion on the issue supported doesn't even factor into it.
@E.T. Cook: I'm not usually a rah-rah American, but in this case I think these words say it better than I ever could: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Yes, human rights are rights for *all* humans. I should think that, too, would be self-evident.
As an IPhone and Apple Computer user, as well as a loyal apple product user and supporter, I am outraged at apple's NO vote and $100,000 gift for anti Prop #8. This cause IS NOT a POLITICAL ISSUE OR A CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE BUT A MORAL ISSUE. A moral issue that all Christians for two thousand years have supported and prayed about and has been part of our faith. For Apple to have so little regard for out Christian faith to call this a political issue is beyond all comprehension.
I will do all that is in my power to have all Apple equipment removed from all Christian churches and organizations.
@E.T. Cook "Yeah. In America...we definitely have our priorities backwards."
This might mean more if it weren't coming from a man who spends his days concern-trolling the comment threads of Apple blogs.
Nice job Apple!
Where is marriage mentioned in the Bill of Rights?
@Anonymous (macalope?)
Yes, we have gotten into a day and age when we just stick a vituperative label on those that disagree with us. I love the huddle to take a certain m.o., try to categorize it, and then use the title pejoratively against that individual. How, well...disingenuous.
Either way, I don't feel the need to defend myself. Obviously, I have made some kind of impression on you, if you have managed to follow my commentary across multiple blogs enough to readily identify who I am. I, actually, am flattered.
Thank you for noticing!
Granted, there are other atrocities in the world, but I didn't know we had to line them up in order and only work on the worst one, one at a time.
There things that one has the power to do, and things that one can't really influence. This is important to Apple because they value their employees, and this affects them deeply. They didn't do this for their market, they did it for their employees.
If you think this isn't a real risk for Apple, you are living on another planet. They could stay quiet, and reap monies from both camps. The increased sales to GLBT for this will not outweigh the anger and outrage from the far right canceling their orders with Apple.
To E.T.Cook: your need to refer to this as a "homosexual rights" issue and therefor less important because "homosexuals" are less important is clear for all to see. For you such a distinction is appropriate, for others that distinction is the very thing we are fighting.
Was fight against anti-miscegenation laws about "black's rights?"
Thank you Apple! You are doing the right thing. Ignore the homophobic trolls out there. This is a human rights issue. Well done!
Not sure why that came out "Anonymous".
Anyway, yes, that's some feather in your cap, there, E.T. You can certainly feel proud of how you spend your time and judge how other people spend theirs.
Cough.
Sincerely,
The Macalope
Another point:
If Dan had said his favorite cause was Cerebral Palsy, Special Olympics or some other such worthwhile cause, I doubt very much he'd get the kind of negative response to his priorities that he's gotten on this one here. That is telltale.
To anyone who is claiming that there are other problems in the world that the US needs to be addressing... Does not the bible say, "Before pointing out the splinter in your neighbors eye, first remove the log from your own." or something to that effect?
Fix the problems here at home (equality), before we fight off the problems elsewhere.
To anyone who talks about this "institution" of marriage, do you need to be reminded that before the christians and roman catholic church started murdering everyone who was homosexual, the Greeks and Romans at their peaks were avid practitioners of homosexuality? So were the Egyptians. It was pretty popular back in the day. You should try it, we can learn a lot from the past.
If you think that two homosexual gentleman getting married is going to diminish the value of your marriage, I feel really bad for your spouse. And if your spouse feels the same way, then the foundations of your marriage probably aren't very strong to begin with.
Apple holds a positive stance in a would of misguided priorities.
I cannot understand how such a large group of people want to write blatant discrimination into the constitution of this wonderful state...
I believe that the basis of this issue is a religious matter (even though they are trying to cover this up for marketing purposes) and offer up a possible solution. It was a mistake in the first place for any government to have given civil authority to a church-based custom. This is where the problem started. People who are against prop 8 want equal treatment under the law - nothing more. Why not let these disparate groups "keep" marriage as their own to manage as they will and instead change the laws to recognize the commitment between same-sex partners and opposite-sex partners as being the same, just call it something else. Don't make this about semantics.
If everyone had civil unions under the eyes of the law, with equal rights, then churches could marry who they choose - rights-wise it would then make no difference. If certain groups want to discriminate, that is their choice. But I know that there are many loving churches out there that are happy to marry same-sex couples. Marriage then only has symbolic meaning as a commitment between 2 loving people, as is truly the intent.
It's a pretty simple solution to keep everyone happy. There are state-sponsored civil unions for all couples with equal rights - marriage is then "optional" and has nothing to do with civil liberties.
Understand this though... no one can take away my right to marry the one who I love to serve their own concept of morality. And stop trying to protect your children from me. I am likely a better parent than the vast majority of you.
Here's the dilemma that all of you parents should consider... what if your son or daughter turns out to be gay? What if they grew up seeing your passionate fight towards taking rights from gay people and vocalizing the immoral nature of that lifestyle? Do you think that this is not going to cause permanent damage to them? Do you not think that this is a form of abuse? Do you not wonder what makes adolescent gay children much more prone to suicide? Think about this when you say that prop 8 will protect your children...
While I support Prop 8 I am not upset that Apple has contributed to fighting against it. I don't "hate" them for disagreeing with me just as I would hope that they would not "hate" me for supporting Prop 8. Rational people can disagree on this issue.
But saying it is about civil rights is a bit misleading since the judges who supported the ruling in the California case stated that homosexual couples already have all of the same civil rights as married couples (if you read the opinion you will actually see that this "sameness" in regards to their rights was one of the reasons for their ruling). So saying this is about civil rights is a red herring. Gay couples' civil rights will not change no matter what happens with Prop 8 because of other laws that already exhist in California. Their right to call their union a marriage is what will be determined.
But I can understand how someone would have a different opinion on that subject. So, I am not going to call up Apple and threaten them with losing my business since that would be as silly as them telling me that I am an anti-gay bigot simply because I think marriage should be defined as being between a man and a woman.
I think everybody involved in this debate should try to do more to influence those who disagree with them and less to try and intimidate them.
I wrote a letter to Apple regarding this issue. Here it is...
To whom it may concern, I woke up this morning, fired up my awesome iMac, pulled up Safari, and started reading news items from my homepage, www.apple.com/startup. Much to my dismay, I saw a concerning announcement under the "Top Stories" titled, "No on Prop 8." I am deeply disappointed that Apple has chosen to unabashedly financially and publicly support efforts to defeat Proposition 8 in California this November. According to your website, "Apple is committed to bringing the best personal computing experience to students, educators, creative professionals and consumers around the world through its innovative hardware, software and Internet offerings." -Apple (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2004/jan/08hp.html) If the above statement is true, then what part of giving $100,000 to a partisan political campaign fits under Apple's goal of creating the "best personal computing experience"? Regardless of the personal or political views of Steve Jobs and the Apple team, as a company, Apple should simply remain neutral in the social, political, and moral issues at hand surrounding Prop 8. By publicly endorsing "No on Prop 8" you are forcing myself and other Apple-super fans like myself, as well as the majority of average California voters who agree that "marriage is between a man and a woman" (remember the similar Prop 22 passed by an overwhelming 61% majority in 2000) to rethink making ANY Apple related purchases. I have been devoted to Apple for years. I have purchased several Apple computers, successfully encouraged friends and family to do the same, have been thanked by ex-PC users for turning them to Apple, and in fact am typing this complaint via the ultra slim aluminum Apple Keyboard connected to my iMac. Unfortunately, because Apple has decided to step outside the bounds of the company's goal of providing great computers and into the political arena (simply labeling it a "civil rights issue" doesn't change the fact that Apple donated $100,000 to a partisan political campaign), I will no longer purchase, recommend, encourage, or support Apple in any way shape or form. I was recently thinking of buying the brand new MacBook--not anymore. The office I work in has been thinking about replacing all of its PCs with an Apple network of computers--not anymore. In fact, I will be forwarding a copy of this letter to as many people as I can, encouraging them to take similar efforts... ...until, Apple withdraws it's official support from "No on Prop 8" or makes a donation of the same amount to "Protect Marriage.com (Yes on Prop 8)." Please notify me when this has taken place, so I can resume shopping at the Apple Store and inform my friends, family, and co-workers to do the same.
Greg,
Unfortunately, it isn't the same. You really do run into "separate but equal" inequities. Plus, as things stand now, we don't get to do things like file joint tax returns at the federal level, obtain COBRA continuence insurance, etc. Once enough states allow gays to civilly marry, then the feds may have to finally pony up to the bar.
The other thing, is when opposite sex married folks travel from state to state, they are still married. They get to make health decisions, take disposition of remains, visit their spouse in the hospital, etc. When I leave California, all bets are off. I may as well be a stranger to my partner of 13 years. This is truly frightening.
A good primer is here for what we don't necessarily have: http://bit.ly/3tEoLn
@Kiltbear
Are you really going to rely on strawman arguments? Did I say that homosexuals were less of people? That is patently absurd- and it is that intellectual dishonesty that can get you into trouble.
My point was, regardless of race, gender, creed or color, there are situations around the world that should take precedent. I just thought Dan's remark that this was his "favorite cause". It is quite obvious though, that you are the one with a bias. Because the individual in question is homosexual, somehow that warrants a higher level of consideration? Who is the one that is prejudiced at this point?
I certainly don't downplay the homosexual rights movement, but I think it to be exceedingly disingenuous to refer to it as a "human rights" issue given its company in that category.
You utilize extremely powerful references frivolously, and ultimately, it dilutes the value of the word and reference.
As a reader above mentioned, it is probably a PR move from Apple. As stated above, Apple has endeavored in two faced marketing efforts prior - and given up their "principle" once it was uneconomical to possess it.
Seems hardly worth a high five, much less commendation. Perhaps I am just too daft to see it though, and you are right.
@Macalope
This is ironic coming from you, who makes at least a partial living off of vituperative screeds, and judging others. You are one of the most inflammatory pundits in the Mac community, and you have the audacity to reprimand someone for "judging others". The very cadence of your blog is one of sensationalism.
I concede that I read it voraciously, but instead of taking criticism constructively (I am merely one reader after all), you seem to hold a grudge. I'm still a reader. I'm still a fan. But if you can't take criticism, perhaps you shouldn't place yourself in such a public forum?
@TheTruth
The assertion that this is merely a religious issue shows your ignorance of the other side's arguments. Have you even bothered to research it?
There is a whole litany of non-religious reasons why people don't support homosexual unions or marriage. Scientific studies regarding the healthy development of children, and the necessity to have a maternal and paternal dynamic in child rearing is just one of a handful of issues that are secular by nature.
@ Ronald V. Leader: Don't drag all Christians into this. There are plenty who support gay marriage.
@Eric-
"What about Mormons - won't they now say that we should honor multiple wife marriages?"
The Mormon church stopped practicing polygamy 118 years ago and today excommunicates any members found to be practicing it. They are also in support of Proposition 8. Even if it doesn't pass (and I strongly hope that it does) the church's stance on marriage will not change.
Other than that, I agree with you completely.
If someone wants to "protect" marriage, they need to start by outlawing DIVORCE!
Those of you who believe that marriage should only be between a man and a woman- that's your personal belief and I can respect it. But what gives you the right to force that belief on others? Iran's leader believes that Israel shouldn't exist. Does that mean we should let him destroy Israel? Maybe even give him a nuke or two to help? What about Hitler, who believed that anyone without blond hair and blues eyes should be killed? Were we wrong to fight against him to help all the people he threw in the concentration camps since he believed they should be there?
This is just awful news. I'm not a republican but I also don't support gay marriage which I am firmly convinced is a perverted lifestyle. Having said that, I also would not get my company involved in support of Prop. 8. I feel this is for individuals and not the place of companies like Apple. What Apple and Google are doing is wrong. I would also be disappointed if the two companies were in support of Prop. 8. It's simply not their place to use their influences in that manner.
I believe that the bible is still the Word of God today and the consequences for sin has not changed. The end of these types of perverted lifestyles, pornography and child porn included is eternal separation from God in hell fire: Romans 6:23 & Genesis 19.
I'm glad Windows 7 is looking so good...
All it takes is a basic knowledge of anatomy to see that men and women "fit" with each other. Two men don't "fit". Two women don't "fit". It's so sad to see that many cannot acknowledge this basic fact about human anatomy.
In addition to what we can learn from basic human anatomy, I think the practice of homosexuality is a moral issue, not a civil rights issue. Some things are considered acceptable behavior, other things are considered unacceptable behavior.
Unfortunately many people, myself included, don't want to be told that their behavior is wrong.
If someone said he had a right to abuse my children, I'd say that such activity would be wrong. It would not be an issue of civil rights, it would be a moral issue.
Many decisions we make as human being are moral choices. The practice of homosexuality has been considered immoral by most people over most of human history.
If one needs more of a basis for making moral decisions, he/she must look for a standard beyond what can be provided by other people. If people are left to their own devices, they'll make up their own morality, and everyone will have a different view of what is and what is not moral.
Therefore the only rational and sound recourse is to look for divine guidance for moral choices.
Can anyone point me to a source of credible, divine guidance that promotes the practice of homosexuality?
[Please not that I'm not condemning anyone. I'm voicing my view that certain practices are immoral. Among many immoral activities, homosexuality is one of them.]
@jdw
Relying on a divine definition of morality is bound to fail. Religion is far too fractured too create such a global definition. Don't forget that Christianity (an extremely split religion itself) is not the only religion. There's also Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism, and countless other, more minor religions. Then there's also those who don't follow any religion at all. You expect them to follow a divine interpretation of morality simply because it is a divine interpretation?
I think that morality can be defined as whether or not the action hurts someone or something. For your example about abusing a child, it would be immoral because the child is being hurt.
Whereas, if a gay couple gets married, who does it hurt? The immoral action here would be denying marriage to the gay couple because then they wouldn't be able to be completely happy. Now they're being denied the pursuit of happiness.
@the general population
I'd love to here a logical, rational argument for denying marriage to homosexual couples, but so far, the only reasons people can come up with are, "They shouldn't be able to marry because I think it's wrong."
To that I ask: "Why do you think it's wrong?"
And it seems like the answer is always, "Because I do."
Good on Apple!
Not only is Apple ecologically responsible but they're SOCIALLY responsible too. Nice to see them stand up for what's right.
@jdw
"It's so sad to see that many cannot acknowledge this basic fact about human anatomy. "
And, simply put, there are those who don't believe that anatomy is the limiting factor of what humans can or can't do. Or should a man with no legs not be able to compete in the Boston Marathon? This country was founded on the principles of tolerance and freedom-including *religious* freedom. What's sad is to see people reject these tenets so quickly when it's something they disagree with. Personally, I'm with Voltaire on this one: I don't agree with what you're saying, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
"If someone said he had a right to abuse my children, I'd say that such activity would be wrong."
Look, this isn't about "enforcing" gay marriage. Men can go ahead and marry women and vice versa, no problem. Nobody has ever given me a reasonable, concrete explanation of how allowing two men or two women to marry hurts anybody. Comparing it to child abuse is flat out unreasonable.
"The practice of homosexuality has been considered immoral by most people over most of human history."
I find nothing compelling about the idea of "majority rules" here. Humanity is hardly infallible when it comes to making these kinds of decisions, and might does not make right.
"Can anyone point me to a source of credible, divine guidance that promotes the practice of homosexuality?"
There are a lot of people who would consider the concepts of "credible" and "divine" as antithetical. There are also many people who simply do not turn to the divine-or, your divine anyway-for their moral judgments. But they have as little right to outlaw your practices as you do to outlaw theirs. I may not be a Christian, but I think that when Jesus said "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," he was onto something.
To the editors of
Macworld, MacUser, Mac OS X Hints, iPhone Central, PC World etc.
Please stay out of politics and ballot issues. I don't visit any of your sites for political opinions (let alone under informed ones) Stick to what you do best. Allowing this kind of article to be posted in this forum was a very poor editorial decision at best.
Would your advertisers be ok with you choosing to alienate more than half of your reader base?
If you continue to allow this kind of personal bias to invade your tech blogs, I, and I'm sure many others will simply stop visiting your sites for good. (And wherever the opportunity arises, to vote by withholding my dollars from your publications and from those who advertise in them.
Since you've opened this door, I'll take the opportunity to present another view.
Care to see what this ballot initiative could mean to California's families? Please see the following brief video wherein a family's right to teach and educate their child was removed by the state. Even their right to opt-out!
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1815825713
They put this little boys dad in jail for standing up for what he believes in! For defending his freedom!
Is socialism what we want? Really? Do we want the "state" dictating what you should personally learn or believe? "States" are notoriously bad at educating children morally. I don't want the state forcing doctrine into my children's education (at 5 years old? Do you really think it's appropriate to begin this kind of a discussion with a 5 year old? Do you have children?) At minimum, as a parent I should have the right to choose. How could anyone of any sex have rights that supersede our rights as parents to raise and educate our children??
Take a look at states records historically. The "state" in Nazi Germany chose what children would learn (Hitler youth anyone?), Communist Russia/China did/do choose what children should learn (stellar job eh?) What gives the states of California or MA the right to force children to believe anything? What gives them the right to remove parents rights to determine how and when serious matters like this should be discussed?
For a more balanced view of what Prop 8 is really about, please see the following:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zbpDe_QhS0
Same sex couple already have the same rights as traditional married couples in California according to the California Family code section 297.5
FAMILY.CODE
SECTION 297-297.5 (I've only pasted the first paragraph, there is much more to it)
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=fam&group=00001-01000&file=297-297.5
(a) Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights,
protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same
responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they
derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules,
government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources
of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.
So it would seem this isn't about rights at all, but rather is about re-defining marriage.
Did you know that in the nine European nations have had same-sex marriage since the early 90's just 2 percent of same-sex couples in these countries ever bother to marry? One lovely side effect in those same countries that has been noted is a 46 percent increase in out-of-wedlock births. (More broken families, more damaged children, more burden on the system, more crime.)
What should we legalize next? Polygamy? “Consensual” incest? (The judges who overrode the people of California note that historically, those become part of a society that allows same sex marriage. But somehow they beleive it won't happen here.)
We're trying to change the definition of marriage for everyone based on the lobbying and fund-raising skills of 2% of somewhere around 3-5% of California's population?? When less than 2% of ssame-sex couples are likley to take advantage of it? Still think this is about equality?
The reality:
Proposition 8 places into the California Constitution language defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. It does not take away any rights or benefits from gay domestic partners. The commercials that say otherwise are simply untrue.
To all: Please stop listening to "sound bites" from the "talking heads," tv commercials, your neighbors, your co-workers as well as the predominantly under-informed opinions of bloggers and research these things for yourselves. You owe it to your family you owe it to the children of California and this nation.
R
Interesting to see what doesn't show up in this blog. Mr. Moren freely expresses his own opinion, and yet doesn't let opinions and analysis flow freely the other way.
Based on what I've seen so far it appears he's selectively allowing posts through to back up his own opinions and misrepresent others.
What a shame.
I don't actually live in the US, but it does make me sad that Apple has come and supported this. I honestly don't believe that a company should choose sides in these matters. It makes it hard for people who do support Prop 8 to respect Apple now and I know there are plenty of Christians that use Macs. I have been an Apple fan for years and while I can't see myself returning to Windows. I am very disappointed. I wouldn't expect Apple to support a Yes for Prop 8 either. They need to be neutral. I have just convinced my church to purchase a new Mac and now I don't know what to do. This is a terrible day. P.S. I think Apple should have put the money to homeless people or 3rd world countries, they need it more.
Make computers and nothing else.
Not all humans have to have equal rights: kids, criminals, mindless, visionless, tourist, ecc. You as american have more rights than me who am a tourist in your country. And this is right.
Today in California is impossible not give money to homosexual's cause and survive. And Apple knows
Anonymous said:
Interesting to see what doesn't show up in this blog. Mr. Moren freely expresses his own opinion, and yet doesn't let opinions and analysis flow freely the other way.
Based on what I've seen so far it appears he's selectively allowing posts through to back up his own opinions and misrepresent others.
Hmmmm... Seems to me that there are more than 40 replies and the majority of them either disagree with Dan's opinion or are calling him out for posting it. Maybe you're the one with bias?
Dan, you opened up a can of worms!!
"World hunger. War. Despotism. Sex Slavery. Genocide." Human rights are at the root of every human conflict. ALL those issues are about people who treat others as less than human. Human rights are at the root of every political issue.
It's another interesting argument, folks--to insist that we not worry about same-sex marriage when we have bigger issues to worry about. By that reasoning, why bother doing anything if it doesn't save the rainforests or stop world hunger? Why bother arresting a car thief when the world is full or murderers? Why bother worrying about litter when the polar ice is melting? Why not just sit indoors with a blanket over your head?
So Apple is choosing not to sit indoors under a blanket, but is instead standing up for human rights. Good for Apple!
Well, I guess that's where the rainbow in the original logo comes from! haha!
Seriously though, the only opposition to this is a religious one, specifically Christian. Marriage has been around a lot, lot longer than Christianity. Christians, since they did not invent marriage, do NOT have the right to define it for other people. Perhaps in a company the size of Apple, there might just be a gay person or two somewhere designing or even (gasp) building the computers you are using right now!!!! Thank you Apple for taking a moral stand for human rights.
I am not gay and I do not have a MAC - I am a PC! But I am so impressed with Apple for this that I might just get a MAC out of support for good business!
Thank You Apple for always thinking outside the box and for doing the right thing!
Taking a position on a ballot over an issue that does not affect directly itself is, IMHO, not a very sound movie from a commercial company. I'm saying that without any regard to the matter of the ballot or the part Apple has chosen to sustain.
But, when you have a politician as al gore in the board of directors...
BTW, I believe that Apple, in its ecologist fervor, should have thought also of the eyes of its customers, vexed by the reflections on its new glossy displays.
First of all, I'm very impressed, pleased and grateful that Apple has put both its money and mouth behind defeating proposition 8. Second, I am struck by the bitterness and hatred of Pro 8 advocates. Third, I wish all those who are horrified by this action of Apple's to switch platforms. Embrace Vista. Really. Go for it.
But of course, that simply won't happen. Even the people bloviating the most today will continue to purchase Apple products. Maybe part of it is familiarity, but most of it is practicality and priorities.
To give up on Apple ... for "religious" reasons? Why ... that would be really inconvenient and quite the sacrifice. Best just bleat instead.
Like many others out there, I am very disgusted with Apple. I have recommended them highly in the last few years to anyone and everyone. I have spent quite a bit of money on Apple Products, only to find out that they are using some of it for something I am very much against. As much as I like Apple products, I sincerely hope that this hurts them. I have a very hard time doing business with a company that pulls a stunt like this.
This is all pretty funny. Having lived in california for quite a while, I can only imagine something this... pointless... would pass not because of wholesome white christians voting for it, but because of the legions of catholic mexicans/other hispanics that live there (full disclosure: I am mexican, and am sort of technically catholic). Also, not all christians are for this sort of stupidity. I've seen several signs in much more conservative Florida (where there is a similar ballot measure) in front of christian churches proclaiming their disdain for such a measure, for what that's worth.
To anyone citing divine sources: the bible or any other divine work is only divine if you believe in it. To everyone else, it's just a book. Remember, even the bible was written by a man.
And there are no credible studies saying children with gay parents are any worse off than any other kid, and some that show they have some advantages, such as they undeniable fact that a gay couple never accidentally has a kid, and the coincidental tidbit that they are usually older and more financially stable than their straight counterparts before taking on the responsibility of children.
And yeah, guy who pointed this out, if marriage is so sacred, what's up with all the divorce?
But it really boils down to is this: arguing on the internet is like... well... you know. So why am I here? I'm not gay, I don't even really know anyone who is. I do, however, have cancer. What does that have to do with anything? Two things: I'm in the hospital for four days to receive chemo, so I really have nothing better to do, and two, would I like to see Apple donate money like that to cancer research? Sure, I mean steve-o himself got to see that monster in person, but whatcha gonna do? At least Apple isn't responsible for flushing our (everyone's? sorry rest of world) economy down the crapper by giving people mortgages they couldn't afford and then making all these interesting unregulated securities based on them that get these AAA credit ratings... I mean, there ARE more important things to concern ourselves about, aren't there?
having used only apple products from 1984 to date. no more. no time. for my company and all of our clients. i also sold all of my apple stock. bye bye apple. hello dell.
Separate but equal anyone?
A lot of these people are for giving homosexual couples the same rights, however not the 'privilege' of being married. This is the same separate but equal that we saw in the last centuary and a half in this country.
People should have the right to marry whoever the want, and saying that [i]anatomy[/i] has anything to do with marriage is disgusting. Does someone who has had testicular cancer still have the right to marry? Does someone who is missing legs allowed to walk? Does any of this actually hurt anyone???
For some real ideas:
http://www.thehpalliance.org/
how can someone argue that gay people arent people. that is so contradicting. so your saying its OK to judge people on who they are attracted to but yet your religion is perfect.
HOW CAN A RELIGION BE SACRED AND PERFECT WHEN ITS TELLING YOU TO JUDGE SOMEONE.
thats like so contradicting.
To those of you claiming to be dumping Apple over this, you should also stop using products from these companies:
Will you do this, or are you just blustering about your "moral outrage"?
We're past worrying about what antigay bigots think about this issue. Equality matters. Antigay opinions carry about as much weight as racist or sexist ones. We're (slowly) leaving them behind, and the opposition knows it.
Good for Apple.
well thank you all straight people who think you can decide who i should spend the rest of my life with. thank god i live in massachusetts.
My main problem with Apple giving money is not who they are giving it to.. although that does disappoint me very much. The thing that makes me sick, is Apples decision to slap loyal customers in the face by represent things that many of us can't support. If Jobs chose to support them, fine. But Apple has no business doing that.
This is the difference from Apple and Google. Google's founders gave money.. not Google. Considerate move.
I love Apple computers. And like the movie industry I see a capacity to do great good. But when they step out of what they do best. I see them crush my spirit in how lost they really are and how very far they are from where we as americans have come from. Apple, continue to make great computers. But please let your employee's both for and against this issue give money to what they believe in, not the company.
I have been an Apple supporter and exclusive user for years. But no more. I was planning to purchase a new computer, ipod and when my contract finished on my phone, an iPhone. But not now. You have lost my business, I do not want to support this with my dollars, so I'll take my dollars elsewhere.
I am an Apple stockholder and am quite disappointed in Apple's decision to publicly oppose Proposition 8 and to make a contribution to the No on 8 campaign. This shows poor judgment on the part of Apple to make a public political statement of this type. The majority of Americans, including both the Republican and Democratic presidential and vice-presidential candidates, are in favor of marriage between a man and a woman. I am opposed to the image that Apple will be seen as a company endorsing Hollywood-type values over family values.
From the perspective of a Canadian citizen living in La belle province - Québec - the way some Americans refuse to separate State and Church, and to accept that some people are different, is properly astounding.
Is it possible that Canada, which is not a degenerate country, is a greater democracy? I'm beginning to believe so.
Homosexuals are welcome in Canada, where they have the legal right to marry.
Have a look up North.
Roger Gauthier, Sainte-Sophie
I support apple in this move and I will vote no on 8. Although I have a hard time with calling a gay civil union a "marriage" I think we need to recognize that is just a word. What we're talking about is how people are allowed to live their lives. We should not be placing restrictions on the lives of others simply because we dont agree with their lifestyle.
how can you hope to claim that you stand for family values when you oppose marriage?
@ A. Gorden
Is that what I said? No. I just scoffed at the notion that it was the OPs favorite cause.
Stop putting words in my mouth. As is evidenced by my diatribes above, I am more than able, and willing, to speak for myself.
People like you are ridiculous. You don't even read, and just respond with reckless abandon.
@E.T. Cook: "I just scoffed at the notion that it was the OPs favorite cause."
Yes. That's definitely what you did. Thanks for making it personal.
"People like you are ridiculous. You don't even read, and just respond with reckless abandon."
Pot, meet kettle.
i'm laughing so hard at the people saying they will no longer use apple products LOL what a great revenge for the gay people they hate to have them use third grade stuff hahaha
Government has no right imposing one groups moral beliefs on everyone. Government also shouldn't be in the marriage business & people shouldn't get hung up on the word "marriage".
The word "marriage" actually has two meanings here, a religious meaning, which is up to an individual's church or other religious institution to define, and the civil meaning, which is basically a contract between two individuals.
This second meaning is what the law is really about and has absolutely NO religious or moral implications. The two individuals who enter into that contract (call it marriage, civil union, or whatever you want to call it) have certain rights of property ownership, visitation if one is hospitalized, and many other things. This should have NO connection with the religious definition of marriage.
Bravo to Apple for standing up for what's right.
P.S. -- the Mormons, who have traditionally practiced polygamy are the ones who are most strongly advocating Prop. 8. How hypocritical is that?
@ jdw
"Can anyone point me to a source of credible, divine guidance that promotes the practice of homosexuality?"
sure, no problem. Just pass me the evidence that any divine entity indeed exists, and I point you to that guidance.
Deal?
THANK YOU APPLE! And Thanks, Dan for standing up for this.
I'll be buying MORE Apple stock, that's for sure!
Those who speak so badly of others because of their supposed "morality" are actually useless. I'm with Matt: show me undesputable evidence that there is a "divine" entity, and I'll give you the time of day. Until then, keep your beliefs silent.
I figured there would be a lot of pro-Prop8 people leaving comments, which i know many will end up doing stupid things (such as selling their Apple stock, boycotting Apple products, or worse, switching to WINDOWS... yuck). Honestly, Apple could do what they want with their money. Other companies donate money to causes or candidates I don't approve of... some which i honestly don't approve of, but I don't make a drama scene about it like some of the people here. I am not going to get into the whole political scene, but I still buy from those companies.
Honestly, I don't care if the measure passes or not. It will not affect me in any way, shape, or form. If it passes then fine, people can marry whoever they want. If not, it doesn't affect me either way. People make it seem like they will be forced to marry someone their own gender. What I am trying to get to is that people should do as they please as long as it doesn't affect others directly.
On second thought I really like controversy, so I hope Prop 8 passes so it could make a lot of people angry... hahaha