It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Apple speaks out against new Mississippi religious freedom law

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Apple doesn't really give two #s about this law, they couldn't care less, they are just using this as good publicity in my opinion.

That being said, I do agree with their statement whether I believe they're being genuine about it or not. These "religious freedom" laws are really "religious bigotry" laws. How would you feel if your state made a law that stated that people could deny you service personally? I'm sure you'll say you wouldn't care and would go somewhere else to shop but that's not the point here, the point is that discrimination, no matter who it is against, should not be law. That goes against the very foundation of our Constitution, that everyone deserves life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. There is no discrimination in those words, it encompasses all people.




posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
OK, I checked out the "law". Seems like what happened is that Miss decriminalized discrimination..... against the gay community. When that happens in Iran people get bent out of shape. But here it's OK? It's the gov't making theocratic decisions for the public.

Exactly. Which is what all of these states are doing. Legislating bigotry.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: SomeDumbBroad
At the same time, if a business that is privately owned chooses to discriminate, I think that should be on them. They should be allowed to refuse people and the people they offend should be allowed to protest and refuse to shop there.



They are the only grocery store in a small town - - the next town being 20 miles away.

They think the physically disabled will break something or scare away customers.

Military vets not welcomed.

Single mom trying to buy food for her kid. Oh, sorry - - my religion won't let me serve an unmarried mother. But, there's another store 20 miles away.

Great plan.


edit on 12-4-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I completely agree with you and I guess Apple on this whole thing.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

But you're perfectly okay with religions dictating what laws should or should not be passed? It's just as bad if not worse than corporations doing it.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
I guess they will be pulling their products out of the middle east.

No? I see.

Point taken, but two thoughts on that.

1. Apple hasn't "pulled" their products from Mississippi or N. Carolina, either.
2. Apple is an American company, and as such, has a right to speak out against this in the country they are based, and they are citizens of.


So you are one of those people that believe PACs and Corporations should influence policy instead of people. Good to know who to blame the next time some law is made because of corporate donations.

No I don't, but I do support a company's right to speak out publicly, just like I would a citizen.


So you are one of the people that thinks Corporations have the same rights as citizens? I think that is part of the problem with our country. Corporations are NOT people.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:22 PM
link   
So.

We have people screaming their heads off about big international companies screwing up everything and robbing governments of taxes and using slave labor, and we have the same people praising Apple who is one of those big companies.

Shacka-doodle-doo!



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Metallicus

But you're perfectly okay with religions dictating what laws should or should not be passed? It's just as bad if not worse than corporations doing it.


I am not okay with people being forced to eat pork products against their religion or take any other action contrary to their religion. If people want to engage in certain behaviors that have nothing to do with race or religion (protected in the Constitution) then individuals have to deal with the repercussions of their behavior and with people that don't want to associate with demerit behaviors.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

but you are perfectly fine with forcing people to act against their nature as long is it someone religious you can punish? Okay, got it religious slaves are okay.

No human being or Government should enforce their moral code on another human being unless in defense of property or person.
edit on 2016/4/12 by Metallicus because: eta



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
I guess they will be pulling their products out of the middle east.

No? I see.

Point taken, but two thoughts on that.

1. Apple hasn't "pulled" their products from Mississippi or N. Carolina, either.
2. Apple is an American company, and as such, has a right to speak out against this in the country they are based, and they are citizens of.


So you are one of those people that believe PACs and Corporations should influence policy instead of people. Good to know who to blame the next time some law is made because of corporate donations.

No I don't, but I do support a company's right to speak out publicly, just like I would a citizen.


So you are one of the people that thinks Corporations have the same rights as citizens? I think that is part of the problem with our country. Corporations are NOT people.


They are now.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: SomeDumbBroad
At the same time, if a business that is privately owned chooses to discriminate, I think that should be on them. They should be allowed to refuse people and the people they offend should be allowed to protest and refuse to shop there.



They are the only grocery store in a small town - - the next town being 20 miles away.

They think the physically disabled will break something or scare away customers.

Military vets not welcomed.

Single mom trying to buy food for her kid. Oh, sorry - - my religion won't let me serve an unmarried mother. But, there's another store 20 miles away.

Great plan.





Well that changes my perspective a bit. I was speaking more about cake shops that don't want to make cakes and stupid things like that. I don't think essential things like that should be restricted at all.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
I guess they will be pulling their products out of the middle east.

No? I see.

Point taken, but two thoughts on that.

1. Apple hasn't "pulled" their products from Mississippi or N. Carolina, either.
2. Apple is an American company, and as such, has a right to speak out against this in the country they are based, and they are citizens of.


So you are one of those people that believe PACs and Corporations should influence policy instead of people. Good to know who to blame the next time some law is made because of corporate donations.

No I don't, but I do support a company's right to speak out publicly, just like I would a citizen.


So you are one of the people that thinks Corporations have the same rights as citizens? I think that is part of the problem with our country. Corporations are NOT people.

No. I think the people that run those corporations have the same rights. Not the corporation itself. It's a fine line, I know. I am a business owner, and I feel I have just as much right as any citizen to speak for myself, and on behalf of my business. At the same time, my business is not a person, nor should it ever be regarded as such. Speaking out is one thing, lobbying and influencing law with money is something else altogether.

I don't mind Apple speaking out against this. I do mind if they start using their wealth to get laws passed, no matter how much I might agree with the end result.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Because avoiding taxes and hoarding money is the same thing as speaking out against bigotry, right?

Can I not like an athlete but still respect their athletic ability? Same concept. Bad people can do good things every now and then, that doesn't mean the bad things they do should make us disagree with the good things.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:28 PM
link   
So is Apple going to stop selling phones in countries where homosexuality is a crime?



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Klassified

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
I guess they will be pulling their products out of the middle east.

No? I see.

Point taken, but two thoughts on that.

1. Apple hasn't "pulled" their products from Mississippi or N. Carolina, either.
2. Apple is an American company, and as such, has a right to speak out against this in the country they are based, and they are citizens of.


So you are one of those people that believe PACs and Corporations should influence policy instead of people. Good to know who to blame the next time some law is made because of corporate donations.

No I don't, but I do support a company's right to speak out publicly, just like I would a citizen.


So you are one of the people that thinks Corporations have the same rights as citizens? I think that is part of the problem with our country. Corporations are NOT people.


They are now.


That doesn't make it okay.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

How is giving a gay person the same service as a straight person going against their religious morals though?

Would you defend a KKK member denying service to a black person solely based on their skin color? After all, it goes against their morals to serve a colored person.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
So is Apple going to stop selling phones in countries where homosexuality is a crime?


Well they have to or they would be...you know...complete hypocrites.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
So is Apple going to stop selling phones in countries where homosexuality is a crime?

No, and they haven't stopped selling them in Mississippi either.



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Metallicus

How is giving a gay person the same service as a straight person going against their religious morals though?

Would you defend a KKK member denying service to a black person solely based on their skin color? After all, it goes against their morals to serve a colored person.


I will NOT be the person that tell another human being what to do...not my pay grade and not yours either. I don't force people to do what I think is right. I think people should be free to make their own decisions unlike you and the Government.

You are some sort of Authoritarian who thinks they hold a superior moral code that should be forced on to others just like the religious zealots you claim to be against. People need to leave each other the alone.
edit on 2016/4/12 by Metallicus because: eta



posted on Apr, 12 2016 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

You're ok with people telling others they are not worthy of service though. This law basically tells businesses that it's ok to tell gay people that they can't spend their money however they choose.

I'm not authoritarian either. The Constitution already protects religious freedom, there's no need to make new laws for it. This law goes against both the 1st and 14th Amendments.
edit on 4/12/2016 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join