Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Publicly Comes Out as Gay in Letter Declaring Support for Equality
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Obviously Tim Cook disagrees, which is no surprise, as everyone has their own personal take on the subject "religion".
I read through your post and you seem rather stuck on Lennon. I'm not sure why. He helped write and sing a whole song that was lifted straight out of the Ecclesiastes chapter 3 (Turn!, Turn!, Turn!). I didn't say his entire world-view and values came from the Scripture. He was described as a nice guy, so I would surmise quite a portion of his values matched. I'm really starting to wonder what you are arguing about by this point.
About your other points: sure Hammurabi came along before the Talmud and there are similarities. Sure the case can be made that the 10 commandments are merely an outgrowth of what came before. The case can also be made that they were divinely delivered and the reason the Bible resembles other laws is because all human law is an attempt to reflect, however well or poorly, a transcendent moral standard. Thanks for the link to wiki article. I hadn't seen that clay tablet. Really interesting read. And of course, God specializes in working with the material that comes to hand.
Finally, about atheism being only a lack of a belief in a deity, well to that I say, ideas have consequences.
Last edited:
Actually Tim Cook is putting himself in the long line of celebrities that have come out and made it easier for non-celeb gays to come out as well (which of course is something that some people with a certain agenda do not like to see, but they are slowly becoming very irrelevant). And living openly gay has absolutely nothing to do with "bedroom behavior", it's extremely short-sighted (possibly on purpose) to reduce it to that.
How would you know if He did? You clearly would discount it as coincidence or "the universe" when He does answer and give you signs.
In any case, the point I was trying to make was regarding how faith is derided here when relevant to religion, but used by all in daily life. The hypocrisy of it all is quite interesting.
Says the guy that also keeps talking about Lennon as well. My original comment about Lennon was sarcasm and you ran with it making some invalid point Lennon and scripture. You said and I quote "much of his music was inspired by what he learned in Scripture.". Now you back tracking and saying it was just a song. Trying to surmise about someone based on being a nice guy is a bit silly. The latest school shooting, the shooter was called a 'nice guy'. That's a bit of a jump to say someone was nice therefore they were inspired by scripture, which is basically what you're saying.
As for making a case of divinely delivered morality, that would have to be backed by evidence, which case there isn't any. Short of biblical scripture, there isn't any evidence that even the ten commandments were divinely inspired. Which leads me back to atheism, if no god, there is no divine being providing morality and therefore it's all based on humanities social growth. Which is also far more logical then some divinely inspired moral views that become outdated over time. After all if moral basis were from a divine creator, who supposedly can't do no wrong, can't seem to keep morality static over time, it would seem those morals weren't so divine in the first place.
I'm not sure what is "controversial" about this, or why it was moved to Politics, Religion, Social Issues.
Who we are as gay men and women is not tied to politics or religion, and making it a social "issue" gives it a negative connotation, and it implies that the issue is up for debate.
It's 2014 and who we are, whom we love, and the rights that protect us are not up for debate. Period. End of story.
Equal rights for gay men and women does nothing to diminish the rights enjoyed by heterosexuals. I don't understand why this is still considered "controversial."
Who we are as gay men and women is not tied to politics or religion, and making it a social "issue" gives it a negative connotation, and it implies that the issue is up for debate.
It's 2014 and who we are, whom we love, and the rights that protect us are not up for debate. Period. End of story.
Equal rights for gay men and women does nothing to diminish the rights enjoyed by heterosexuals. I don't understand why this is still considered "controversial."
You seem to be trying to tie down faith into one little corner. Faith that the light bulb will turn on and isn't burnt out isnt the same as faith in a supernatural being being real based on no evidence. The word faith does have multiple meanings. Trying to reference faith on X happening based on real observation vs faith in something that can't be proven are two very distinct things.
I was just going to say that your reminder for tolerance would get turned around on you.
When I took an art history course in college I saw a lot of art that I initially thought were awful, but even those works of art have something to admire. To be honest, the more I learned of each work of art, the more I learned to appreciate it. It turns out, I was just ignorant at first. Please don't curl up like a snail in a salt mine every time you see the name Jesus or of a message that to you resembles "religion". It's not the fault of Jesus that so many people mess up his message. Loving your neighbor is a message that's is easy to admire. Perhaps like a silly college student in an art history course, your view is based on ignorance.
Mathematical "truths" were invented by man, just like you say the Bible was. Science is nothing but the recorded results of experiments. Experience. Thus you can find out why the light didn't turn on when it didn't, but you didn't know it when you threw the switch. In order to get any results, you have to have faith first. Getting into the semantics of belief versus faith is pointless. Take your pick.
I use logic, and reasoning when applying Biblical concepts into my life. I have faith in God, and my experiences tell me that engaging in some things are detrimental, while others are not, exactly as the Bible "tells me so".
You dismiss these concepts and teachings as if you've tried to put them into practice, and failed (which points to the scientific method). Have you?
Please explain to me the fallacy, fault, failure in reasoning, or whatever with the concept of treating your neighbor as you treat yourself. What can it hurt? Is there merit or value behind doing this? What negative consequences would arise if everyone loved each other like the Lord tells us to? Point out to me a single wrong in, say, the ten commandments?
The Bible is chock full of examples of God teaching, people doing both what He says and the opposite of it, and the consequences of doing so. I have seen this happen in my life. I have grounded proof of it. But only my eyes see what I see. I can't show you. I can only tell you about it. God is alive and involved in people's lives, if we let Him do so.
You then, have the choice to dismiss it as insanity, or accept it as something to explore. But if loving my neighbor is crazy, then I'll gladly take the straight-jacket.
----------
Just because you fail to recognize the evidence does not mean that the evidence isn't there.
I'm not the one locking things down into a corner. I'm stepping outside of it, and trying to bring you with me.
To quote Men in Black:
"1,500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was the center of the universe. 500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat. And 15 minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
Here's to the crazy ones.
Nope. Nope. NOPE. Straight people don't keep their personal lives personal. They hold hands in public. They put pictures of their spouse on their desk at work. They openly use opposite-sex pronouns when recounting their weekend activities around the water cooler at work. The put stick figures of their little hetero families on their minivans. That is called heterosexual privilege, when you can be who you are without fear of negative consequences.
So when all straight people agree to keep their personal lives personal, I, as a gay man, will do the same. But really...this kind of comment is TIRING. The world belongs to everyone. You have to share it with everyone, including gay people. And you don't get to quash or silence topics that make you uncomfortable.
I'm inclined to agree that it would be preferable for the CEO of Apple to keep his public persona all about Apple. It's unfortunate that anyone feels it necessary to make a statement about their sexuality. Should not be necessary but there still is a great deal of intolerance. That's too bad.
I hope that now that Cook has made his statement his concentration is on products not social issues.
Steve was a very private person. He has been harshly criticized for that. I think Steve got it all right. Make great products and keep the focus on Apple not any particular individual.
I have not read much of this thread. It is not my intent to step on toes or make waves. I hope everyone with a clock running at Apple keeps their minds on business.
Thanks for reading.
you change your perspective first.. that's how it works..
if you don't change then you're going to continue hearing announcements.
your choice
Talking about ignorance: Why does it appear to be so challenging for some to understand that there are plenty of people that just do not have any need for the concept of "religion"? Your condescending, belittling descriptions like "perhaps a silly student" or "curling up like a snail" are the picture perfect examples for the reason why I'm highly suspect of "religious" people like yourself.
I just peeped your Facebook profile, dude. Pics of you and some woman all over it. I don't need your heterosexuality in my face.
Umm...please educate yourself about majority and minority cultural dynamics before making ignorant comments.
Just because you fail to recognize the evidence does not mean that the evidence isn't there.
I'm not the one locking things down into a corner. I'm stepping outside of it, and trying to bring you with me.
To quote Men in Black:
"1,500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was the center of the universe. 500 years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat. And 15 minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
Here's to the crazy ones.
Evidence is what can be backed. It wouldn't be a religion of faith if there was evidence backing it. But as it stands now, there is no evidence of a god. You're more then welcome to present evidence but given the simple fact that you haven't more then suggests you know that what you believe as evidence doesn't pass as evidence in the manner being talked about. None of that changes the fact that faith on a switch working based on evidence is still vastly different then faith based on no evidence.
As for the MIB quote, that is true but that knowing is based on evidence not faith.
If he truly believes this is a gift from God, he should talk about his basis for that thinking. I doubt the man has read the bible.
Tim Cook's relationship with God is none of your business. He doesn't owe you a damned explanation.
The only sin is the hate.
Almost 2000 posts shows me that the world has a long way to go before there is real equality.
We had to hear about Jobs' marriages and crotchspawn, so why does Tim have to keep his life secret? Ohhh, because his life makes you uncomfortable.
Based on what I see in Scripture, God puts up with a lot of culturally ingrained behaviors: polygamy being one of them. He has never put up with homosexuality according to the Scriptures. There are many churches who try to do an end run around unchanging doctrines, like the Bible's teachings against homosexuality, fornication, and adultery, by playing the "times have changed" card. They do so at their eternal peril and those they influence to the same error. It is very sad to see so many churches lacking in doctrinal integrity.
- Status