“In advance of this afternoon’s introduction of the historic Equality Act in Congress, today 3 major American companies announced their support for comprehensive federal non-discrimination legislation that would establish full, federal equality for all LGBT Americans,” Stephen Peters reports for The Human Rights Campaign. “Each of the leading corporations – which include Apple, The Dow Chemical Company, and Levi Strauss & Co., – released the following statements making clear that they believe all LGBT Americans should have the protections from discrimination in federal law that they deserve.”
Apple: “At Apple we believe in equal treatment for everyone, regardless of where they come from, what they look like, how they worship or who they love. We fully support the expansion of legal protections as a matter of basic human dignity.”
The Dow Chemical Company: – “Dow applauds the introduction of the Equality Act and continues to support a comprehensive federal framework that ensures fairness and opportunity for everyone. Full inclusion of our LGBT colleagues and citizens is quite simply the right thing to do – for business and for society.”
Levi Strauss: – “Levi Strauss & Co. is proud to support the Equality Act. We have a long history of supporting LGBT equality, and the time has come in this country for full, federal equality for the LGBT community. Ensuring fairness in our workplaces and communities is both the right thing to do and simply good business.”
“Each of the three major companies scored a perfect 100 on HRC’s annual Corporate Equality Index (CEI), a nationally recognized benchmark of LGBT inclusion in the workplace, and were recognized on HRC’s list of Best Places to Work for LGBT Equality in 2015,” Peters reports. “‘These remarkable companies have proven once again their tremendous leadership on behalf of LGBT Americans,’ said HRC President Chad Griffin. ‘Time and again, these leaders of Corporate America have asked ‘what more can we do?,’ and each time they’ve stepped up to the plate and delivered. As the fight for full, federal equality enters a new chapter, we are enormously thankful that we have these champions standing shoulder to shoulder with us.'”
Source: The Human Rights Campaign
SEE ALSO:
Tim Cook leads over 8,000 Apple employees in San Francisco Gay Pride Parade – June 29, 2015
Apple CEO Tim Cook celebrates gay marriage ruling: ‘Here’s to the crazy ones’ – June 26, 2015
Tim Cook: Apple ‘deeply disappointed’ with Indiana’s new religious-objections law – March 27, 2015
Apple scores 100% in Best Places to Work for LGBT employees – November 19, 2014
Apple CEO challenges home state of Alabama on LGBT rights – October 27, 2014
Tim Cook, Apple employees march in LGBT Pride Parade in San Francisco – June 30, 2014
Apple CEO Cook makes ‘substantial’ donation for gay rights activists in U.S. South – December 19, 2014
Apple CEO Tim Cook: ‘I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me’ – October 30, 2014
Apple joins Gay Pride parade in Austin, Texas – September 21, 2014
Got a Y? Still a guy.
True. Except, you know, when it’s not.
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complete_androgen_insensitivity_syndrome
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testis_determining_factor
Or how to acquire a Darwin Award voluntarily….
“Transgender?” Let’s just call it what it is: Mental illness.
41% of “transgenders” surveyed report they have attempted suicide and that those who have “medically transitioned” and “surgically transitioned” have higher rates of attempted suicide than the general population. “Transgenders” have higher rate of HIV infections. They are more prone to heavy drinking and the use of drugs. They have high rates of homelessness, unemployment and extreme poverty, even more so in the more difficult economic times of the last 5 years.
http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_report_on_health.pdf
Obviously, surgery or not, sexually confused individuals have a cross to bear. But they very well might be happier if they consider the counsel of former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital Dr. Paul McHugh. “‘Sex change’ is biologically impossible,” he says. “People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized women.” And that’s why he concluded long ago, “We psychiatrists … would do better to concentrate on trying to fix their minds and not their genitalia.”
Psychologist PhD,
You do not represent all psychologists by a long shot.
Apple and these other employers appear to be standing begind a bill to protect people from discrimination. Today people who are bisexual, gay, lesbian, or transgender can be fired and evicted from their homes with no legal protections. I have been fired twice and evicted once for being gay and have been told it was because I was gay. It’s stupid and needs to end.
He is certainly neither Phychologist, nor PhD. No rurprise that he quotes McHugh (the go-to doctor for anti-LGBT crowd). Too bad that McHugh cherry-picks his scientific sources (largely very, very old) in order to support his social (and political) view, and ignores growing body of evidence refuting his views…
The growing body of evidence of which you conveniently don’t provide. Forgive us if we don’t take you at your word. What was your credentials, again?
By the way being the psychiatrist-in-chief in one of the most prestigious medicals schools in the world, is no small potatoes.
As for ‘old’ scientific evidence, it’s only irrelevant if it has been refuted. Which it hasn’t. Transsexuals who have fully transitioned do have a higher rate of suicide than before the process.
I’m not a doctor and I don’t pretend to be one (unlike others here).
If you want to read about McHugh, look him up yourself. Same for the growing body of evidence. That’s how I learned about it. I am not going to google things for you here.
Feel free to say “link or it isn’t so”. It doesn’t change facts.
Facts are facts. Your opinions are your opinions.
Your problem is that you treat your opinions as facts.
You haven’t provided any link to support your “body of growing evidence”, which is cursory when *you* are rebutting the original commenter on his link.
Second, John Hopkins, the medical school that *pioneered* gender reassignment surgery STOPPED doing out of the concerns McHugh and others have had. You’d think that the operation that helped put the school on the map (among other notable achievements) would be the last to give up on it.
Your argument is basically guilt-by-association. McHugh is cited by the “anti-LGBT” crowd so therefore, his experience, knowledge, and expert opinions are therefore discounted. Never mind that his position can stand for itself.
You may not be a doctor, but your tactics are commonly used by commenters who have nothing substantive to offer: vague insinuations, citations without proof, and slander.
You are an intellectual coward, dressed up as a progressive.
“Transsexuals who have fully transitioned do have a higher rate of suicide than before the process.”
I think we are confusing the cause of suicide in this particular thread. Suicidal rates would drop if there was less bigotry and more tolerance in this society for people who identify themselves as transsexual; It’s more about their surroundings than their gender.
I don’t think we need a PhD to understand this one.
A common assertion with out any factual basis. Not supported by research.
When gender re-assisgnment surgery fails to resolve the huge psychological conflicts in a person, it is a HUGE disappointment, but now you haven’t solved the problem and now you have mangled your body irreversibly. That’s the primary issue.
There are many transgendered people who have shared their regret and getting the surgery done, as it failed to solve the psychological issue. Which is why John Hopkins abandoned the practice.
Most transgendered people don’t hang around people who don’t like them, but that’s true for every demographic. So the idea of bigotry as being the primary cause of suicide is nonsense.
You look good in drag. But you are no scientist. Note to Predrag – women don’t have dicks.
As usual, kent, you have it wrong.
It will make your head explode — but there are not just XY and XX two neat sexes with tidy definitions of how they should look and behave.
There are other gene combinations besides the two above.
There are different genes that also affect sex and gender.
There are variations in hormonal expression.
There are variations in internal sex organs.
There are variations in brain structure.
And – head exploding time – there are variations in external genitals… both sometimes being present. Some women have dicks.
And yes – that is NORMAL. It’s not due to “mental problems”. It’s not due to sin and depravity. It’s just nature.
Sean – I hope you encounter such a woman on a date. I bet you hope so too.
Your pathetic and infantile insults don’t address the facts.
And the fact that you can’t deal with the FACTS just confirms (as if we needed any further confirmation) that you are a small-minded and shrivel-hearted bigot.
Sean,
You can’t even tell the difference between a man and a woman and you think you can lecture me. Go in the Restroom and figure out what you are then get back to me. Don’t fiddle around too long.
Your pathetic and infantile insults don’t address the facts.
And the fact that you can’t deal with the FACTS just confirms (as if we needed any further confirmation) that you are a small-minded and shrivel-hearted bigot.
Here is a fact. Bruce Jenner is a man. He is a mentally deranged man, but a man. If you think he is a woman, I suggest you marry him to prove it. But then you think people of the same sex should marry. I forgot, you are just as deranged as Bruce.
You got anything to back up your skepticism? You know, besides your opinion?
Transgenders have a lot of issues, how many of them are socially related and how many of them are intrinsic to the condition I do not know, but in absence of any scientific data, an opinion on the issue is just about as useful as deciding that the heavens revolve around the Earth.
@ PhD
UTTERLY irrelevant. The point is that no-one should be able to say, “I just realized there’s someone working is this office who is a woman, black, gay, Irish, shaves, has a beard, eats shellfish, cheated on his wife once, or, or, or… etc. You’re fired.”
Nor “can’t buy a cake”, nor “can’t rent a room”, nor “must sit at the back of the bus”.
Any talk of emotional problems or extreme, illegal behaviors is irrelevant in attempting to justify DENYING EQUAL RIGHTS TO A CITIZEN of the country.
Correlation does not equal causation.
Probably shouldn’t give psychological advice if you are still having trouble with that one.
Seriously, you are surprised that people who are discriminated against have more mental illnesses? It doesn’t occur to you that maybe treating the discrimination (as Apple is doing) might offer some help?
^ That was a reply to so-called Psychologist PhD.
Many of the mentally ill are high functioning, but remain ill nonetheless.
PsychbabblerPhD
Client. “I have identity issues….”
Psychologist. “Heal thyself. ”
Psychiatrist. “We’re here to help….but only if you admit you are mentally ill.”
Client. “That doesn’t seem right”
‘You’. “Tough shit!”
Words. Seriously. Fail me.
Your comments reveal the shortcomings of pronouncements from one social science discipline about social conditions of a minority group without reference to the history and sociology of the broader social conditions. All the negative personality and life experiences of transgendered persons you list in your first paragraph are characteristic of behaviors of persons who are marginalized, persecuted, and discriminated against by the larger population. Suicide is much too prevalent still among gay teens and youth. As prejudice and discrimination wane, these rates will go down for these “pariah” groups.
“At Apple we believe in equal treatment for everyone…” yeah pedophiles are just misunderstood, murders, rapists etc…
Sigh.
“Don’t give rights to X because Y shouldn’t have rights!”
In what mentally handicapped world does that logic make any sense to you?
Like Godwin’s Law, equating LGBT issues with paedophile criminals, is the last refuge of the clueless, repressed, uneducated, crass minded fool.
Congratulations.
And yet Apple was one of the companies lining up to do business in Iran where all of what Apple supports puts people in jail or worse, much worse. So do they support the rights of Sharia Law in Iran, do they support those that believe and worship in this fashion? Will they push for this legislation in all countries they do business in?
Apple is doing business in America, where they jail people for simple DWB (driving while black), hold people in jail for years (decades) without trial (Guantanamo anyone), and you don’t seem to be complaining? Apple has been doing business in America since its beginning, despite the fact that gay marriage was illegal in many states until about a month ago.
Apple, as well as many (most) other American (and foreign) public companies does business on the world market. They employ people in many countries, and sell their merchandise in many countries. Apple, the company, is headquartered in America. Most of their workforce is in America. While they have no influence (nor right) to publicly advocate for social change in foreign countries (although they on occasion still do this), in America, they have every right to do this, being (I’ll say this again:) an American company.
Apple has on several occasions advocated for personal freedoms of Chinese citizens. They made public comments about Russia on occasion or two. None of this really matters, though. Apple is a publicly traded company, owned by its shareholders, and has a fiduciary duty to grow business by exporting its product on foreign markets, wherever it is legal to do so.
So, to answer (again) the last question in a simple way. Apple most likely will NOT push for legislation in all countries they do business in, as they are an American company, headquartered in America. However, they will certainly support, advocate and push for legislation in America. That is called lobbying, and that is what companies do.
Iran is good. They execute homosexuals. Obama likes Iran. Pre drag likes Iran. I think they like executing homosexuals.
You look good in drag. But you are no scientist. Note to Predrag – women don’t have dicks.
How is selling a product in a country contradictory with encouraging that country to treat people well?
Apple sold products in the US before gays had equal marriage rights.
Apple is going to have more cultural impact and influence where it sells products.
Probably the most anti-regime thing anyone can do in Iran is get Iranian citizens connected to the Internet, which provides them access to information about the outside world, and a means to organize against the regime.
I vote for sil nice from this point on in the thread. We agree to disagree.
You cannot “agree to disagree” with bigots and idiots. So I have to decline your offer to placate kent and his ilk. Equality for all. all people are created equal. Unfortunately some, like kent, choose to sink into the depths of self-righteousness.
The Righteous shall thunder, but the Meek shall inherit the Earth.
Well no book can be right all the time.
You are of course correct that the self-rightous are neither meek nor destined to inherit anything as people see through them.
But it has been people who fought for their rights and freedom inherited the Earth. Meekness doesn’t hold a candle to courage and action.
The cherry picked list of people who are “created equal” under the left list of protected groups isn’t exactly a society of equality.
Given that religious freedom has been tossed out in favor of LBGT rights, it’s hard to take you or anyone else who uses the hammer of the word “bigot”, seriously.
Exactly what is cherry-picked? Apple’s position seems to be that nobody (nobody!) should be discriminated against. That list includes everyone capable of fixing adult consent.
And corollary to that is that nobody can hide behind their own “religious freedom” in order to discriminate against someone else.
KingMel – transgenders are mentally ill. There is such a thing as mental illness. And you should know this.
Silence is even better than sil nice. (Sill iPad sense of humor).
Silly. NOW CUT THT OUT!,,,
Sigh.
Sighs matters 🙂
“At Apple we believe in equal treatment for everyone, regardless of where they come from, what they look like, how they worship or who they love. We fully support the expansion of legal protections as a matter of basic human dignity.”
IF they really believed this, they would have different categories of music, movies, TV, etc for different religious beliefs: i.e. Christian music or Muslim categories. Instead they have categories for “Inspirational” lumping in all religions even yoga into one category. Yet, they have no problem with a LGBT movie category which has semi-pornographic content available from their main movie menus. I don’t want my kids clicking on that horror. And there is no way to hid the flippin LGBT content. Apple are biased, lying hypocrites.
Nobody. If you don’t like the way Music is categorized, go to apple.com/feedback and let them know. If you don’t want your children to see adult-related content (Apple does not have any porn and two guys kissing is no more pornographic as a man and a woman kissing) there are parenteral controls in the iTunes preferences for that.
Much like LGBT is all lumped into a single category, so is “inspirational” lumped into a single category.
I’m having a hard time understanding exactly WHAT would you prefer Apple do? Break out LGBT into separate lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, trans-sexual, asexual….? Or break out “inspirational” into different religious groups (Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, ‘Juche’, Jewish…)? Or both?
You’d need submenus in order to satisfy the righteous. Muslims would prefer a choice of Sunni, Shi’a, Sufi, or Ahmaddiya. Christians? (eye roll) maybe telescoping menus for sects and cults. Programmers would need to implement a complex “tolerance calculus.
One thing seems certain. Somewhere, The Creator is laughing uncontrollably at the absurd intricacies of our delusions.
No I’m not. It’s too trivially stupid to laugh at, never mind uncontrollably. It’s just all rather pathetic, but hardly even rises to that.
Does Apple discriminate against incest, necrophilia, bigamy, pedophilia, and bestiality? If so, how does Apple justfy discrimination against incest, necrophilia, bigamy, pedophilia, and bestiality, and any other form of sexual behavior?
The ones that you list all seem to involve lack of adult consent. Only when you have adult consent of involved parties can you claim rights.
With respect to polygamy, as it is legal in almost fifty countries (vast majority Muslim, in Africa). In such countries, Apple, as well as all other employers foreign or domestic, provide relevant benefits to all spouses. There are many Western (developed) countries that recognise polygamous marriages legally performed in other jurisdictions (and confer rights and responsibilities for such spouses).
So, your question is very transparently ingenuous.
So you’re okay with adult incest then?
Personally, I am not OK, but this is one interesting legal argument.
Social rules have evolved over the centuries when it comes to incest. In ancient times, this was almost the rule for nobility and royalty to preserve the royal blood by marrying sisters or close relatives. Eventually, once the consequences of inbreeding became more clear, incest became morally and socially unacceptable across the world. However, today, there are many countries, both developing, as well as developed, where consensual incest among adults is not illegal (France, Spain, Portugal, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg). Much like gay marriage, this falls squarely into the same category: consenting adults. The state has no business in people’s bedrooms, as long as we aren’t dealing with minors or those who are unable to make decisions by themselves (mentally disabled or ill, etc).
And here you just proved how utterly insane your mentality is.
There are a lot of societal, biological reasons to condemn and forbid incest.
Consent does not trump illogical, narcissistic thinking which affects more than the people involved. No right, when it comes to sex, is entirely individualistic and limited to the personal, since sex itself is about merger and the possibility of creating new life.
Your response makes no sense. You say I’m insane because I am not ok about incest and am against it, then you proceed to argue you are against it as well! So which is it: are you with me (against incest) or against me (in favour of incest)??
I’m not surprised you missed the point.
You say you are personally not ok with it, but you repeat endlessly your “consent adults” mantra. Hell, you’re even blinded by it.
Newsflash: No one cares *you’re* not ok with it. It’s about whether the acceptance of incest is good for any society. But since your paramount concern is insisting personal rights to an ridiculous degree, you can’t see the pitfalls with your stance. Hence, insanity.
If you can’t see the interesting legal/moral questions regarding adult incest you lack subtlety.
Most people think adult incest is wrong. What makes it interesting (from a legal/moral perspective) is that it is right or wrong based on different criteria than most other behaviors.
Most behavior that is wrong between people is due to lack of consent (i.e. abuse, theft, violence, fraud, …). Adult incest, voluntary euthanasia, and a few other topics involve more complex aspects of morality.
Does adult consensual incest really harm society if one or both parties are unable to have children? You can predictably say yes, but hopefully you still grasp that the reasoning for that answer is not as simple as say, declaring terrorism immoral.
But Tim Cook still discriminates. I suppose one could take progressive thinking to the extreme and allow any and all forms of sexual behavior or one could argue that some forms of sexual behavior are deviant and/or socially abhorrent. The only questions are which forms of sexual behavior are permissible, which are not permissible, and who had the moral authority to decide.)
“The only questions are which forms of sexual behavior are permissible, which are not permissible, and who had the moral authority to decide.”
This is true of all behavior. When is it ok to make loud noises? How far to you need to be from a neighbor? Exactly what time at night do loud noises become prohibited disturbances. Does it make a difference if you are watching a loud TV, running a jack hammer, or practicing a musical instrument which is your profession?
Believe it or not, all laws involve judgement as to where they apply. All laws require judgement of what is permissible and not.
For a complete minefield, look into copyright and fair use law.
Tell you what…
How about a true bill that prohibits discrimination against ANY and ALL LEGAL behavior?
What you cite is not legal, under a democratically elected government under the auspices of a democratic Constitution.
“This is important. Politico is reporting that the so-called “Equality Act” will be introduced today in Congress. The bill is the brain-child of the Human Rights Campaign—an influential, sophisticated and lavishly funded LGBT activist organization.
The “Equality Act” is a misnomer. The bill does not protect equality before the law, but unnecessarily and unjustly violates freedom by creating special privileges based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
This proposed legislation would add “sexual orientation and gender identity” (SOGI) to more or less every federal law that protects on the basis of race. It goes well beyond the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)—which would have added SOGI only to employment law.
ENDA, which was first introduced in Congress in 1994, has been defeated each and every Congress. When it was first introduced, ENDA only included “sexual orientation,” but in 2007 “gender identity” was added to the bill. Thankfully, ENDA has never been made law.
Nevertheless, having expanded the bill from including sexual orientation to also including gender identity, activists have also extended this misguided policy well beyond employment—to “credit, education, employment, federal funding, housing, jury service and public accommodations.” These SOGI laws must be resisted, as I explain in chapter six of my new book, “Truth Overruled: The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom.”
The Advocate reports that the “Equality Act’s” special privileges would apply to “public accommodations, public education, employment, housing, federal funding, jury service, legal protections, and credit. The bill would also clarify that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act cannot be used to defend” people who believe marriage is the union of man and woman. That’s right, the bill says that religious freedom needs to take a back seat to special SOGI protections.
The Advocate also reports that the “Equality Act” would require that “sex-segregated facilities must admit individuals in accordance to their gender identity.” That’s right, the bill would require biological males who identify as women to be able to use women’s bathrooms and locker rooms.
The “Equality Act” is bad public policy.”
http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/23/how-so-called-equality-act-threatens-religious-freedom/
And to simplify:
If you have a business, and you are hiring, and one applicant is by all accounts the best candidate for the job, but he is married to a man, you cannot refuse to hire him, nor can you refuse to provide benefits for him and his husband. And you cannot hide behind any available religious freedom laws that may still be on the books.
Your religious freedom cannot trump someone else’s basic human rights. No religion truly requires this.
Sounds good to me.
This bill does not change religious freedom. It just makes it a little harder for people who want to use religion to impose their views on others.
When two religious beliefs disagree then what then? Whose religious beliefs are protected and the whose religious belief are not protected? For example, an atheist (yes, athiesm is a religion) disagrees with Muslim or Jew or Christian. What then? Whose religious beliefs are protected?
(yes, athiesm is a religion)
Good point, Fred. The simple act of not believing something is a religion. But don’t forget to include other ‘lack of belief in…..” E.g. The religions of:
– Don’t believe in Santa Claus
– Don’t believe in the Tooth Fairy
– Don’t believe in Zeus
– Don’t believe in leprechauns
and, of course, many, many more.
But the little people are with us! My grandmother told me so. They are the creatures responsible for Good Luck, something indispensable for any sort of success and something that can not be had in any other way. As for Bad Luck, nothing is required there, only leave people alone to their errant ways and they do themselves in.
We’d better check with Sean!
That was never the issue, but thanks for obfuscating.
Are you backtracking?
It sure sounded to me like you were claiming the religious freedom sky is falling.
I’m sure you can’t read.
The issue wasn’t hiring people. The issue was the right to dissent to have your services and products go towards events that go against your conscience.
Obviously nuance. is not your strong point.
Let’s just make good products! I don’t think Apple’s Ideas on social problems are Germain to computers et al. I don’t care about Tim’s sexual preferences, or his take on politics. Let’s just create an iTunes that works easily!
Tim Cook and Predrag want to make the world, including all the children, homosexual. Because it’s so cool. OK, maybe the putting your thing into an open sewer line is not so cool, but if you don’t mind syphilis and AIDS it’s cool.
No Tim Cook just want to make the world a better place.
By encouraging the world to put its thing into a dirty place where things are not intended, all for fun, and for disease.
You really do hold a daft dogmatic view of the world. It’s quite puzzling to me that in 2015 someone could be so blind to the realities of the world, humanity and to anyone who is different from you, and not by choice, by biology. Sigh.
Over 70% of all syphilis cases are found in the 1-2% homosexual population. A fact noted recently in a homosexual publication.
You hate homosexuals so much you want to cover up the fact about the harm this lifestyle choice produces, including death via AIDS.
kent – your concern for others’ health is terribly misplaced.
ENORMOUSLY more people die every year from
– properly prescribed and used medicines
– tobacco
– vehicles
– guns
and many other causes
I guess focussing on physical and mental health issues that actually matter wouldn’t give you such a great venue for your small-minded pustulating hatred.
All people wanted to make the world a better place…Stalin, Hitler, Lenin, Mussolini, Pol Pot, Sadam Hussein, etc. You know the list. There is no correlation between intent and outcome. I have a high degree of skepticism about those who claim their interests are strictly humanitarian and egalitarian.
You forgot Fred
Ok, nice.
Now get back to focusing of the phrase “It just works.”
I miss those days and that phrase.
Does putting a male sex organ into the lower extremity of the digestive track (the output) fit with
“It just works?”
It does if you are in the business of producing STDs and suicide.
Whatever number of suicides you are talking about, it is microscopic compared to the number of suicides by tobacco each year. Shall we deny those people equal rights, because they have emotional problems that got them and keep them addicted to cancer sticks?
You seem to be fascinated, actually obsessed, by anal sex. Many psychologists would agree it might be a sign of repressed homosexuality…
With respect to anal sex, studies have shown that heterosexuals practice it almost as often as gays, which is around 60% of population. You see, one in three gay couples (and a few more hetero) don’t actually practice it at all.
There are quite a few more stereotypes that frequently come out about various minority groups that are discriminated against.
It is a very dangerous act that produces diseases and causes people to need to wear adult diapers at an early age. It is a public service to warn people of health risks which are serious. Like some
people warn about global warming all the time, which is now global cooling. Syphilis and AIDS are more serious and real threats to health and life.
That statement makes no sense.
In the thousands of years of recorded history of anal intercourse (apparently, it has been done since well before Roman times), no information supports the idea that people who practice it somehow need to wear adult diapers.
Your obsession with anal sex is very peculiar and I’m very much inclined to advise just admitting it and coming out; you’ll likely feel much better about yourself.
You are very uninformed.
But again – even if this drivel was COMPLETELY true (need to wear adult diapers at an early age), that is not a reason to deny a citizen of the country equal rights!!!
By that logic, the incapacity through strokes, circulatory problems, cancer etc. brought on themselves by tobacco smokers should immediately cause them all to become second class citizens. Far more and more serious incapacity in that group.
Democrats don’t give Christians equal rights. Now, marriage is not a right. So you have no grasp of the terms. If it were a right, you could marry your mother, but then you probably already considered that, till you proposed to your father. But that is not a right either. And one cannot marry a child, though homosexual activists promote sex and homosexual sex to children in school curricula. It’s called long term recruiting. And they definitely seek out and have sex with minors. That is not a right. Marrying an animal is not a right, but will be with the current Supreme Court. In other words, you are an idiot.
Okay, I’ve left you alone until this point. Christians are not persecuted, and their rights are not transgressed. As a practicing Christian myself, I can tell you that we are free to practice as we wish WITHIN OUR OWN WALLS. What we don’t have the right to do is impose our beliefs upon others.
I leave you with this…
“Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Mark 12:17
Mixing religion with matters of state serves neither.
And anyway, if you absolutely must condemn (though it’s above your authority) then condemn the sin, not the sinner.
With every new post, the deranged lunatic becomes more deranged. The posts are ever more absurd.
Just to quickly clarify, for those few who may consider the above post an argument for whatever position it is (and the post is so incoherent, it is a challenge to decipher what it is arguing): Marriage is a right that state confers to ALL adults, regardless of their race, religion, social status, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or any other arbitrary criteria.
Incest is currently illegal in America, but is legal in many other countries around the world. What you and I may consider socially and morally reprehensible may be perfectly legal (if not socially or morally acceptable) elsewhere. I have no authority (moral, legal or otherwise) to judge anyone else on that matter. Neither have you (nor anyone else).
No “homosexual activist” has ever promoted sex and homosexual sex to children in schools. Nor do they seek out to have sex with minors (those are pedophiles, and that is against the law in pretty much all of the world).
Marrying an animal…. Well, what else is to say but absurd…
The movement towards equal rights for women was treated with derision and violence. The violence against the civil rights movement is a sickening blot on the history of the country. Still plenty of knuckle-draggers trying to fight that one.
Bringing up your preferences, or illegal activities or a bronze-age book of stories are all irrelevant. If people break the law, that’s a separate matter to be dealt with.
Citizens of a country should have equal rights… period. It’s just that simple.
It amazes me that people still fight the rights of others.
But then again, most people don’t understand science.
We evolved to the point where a few percent of us started moving forward and civilization happened. But in biological terms, there has not been enough time for much change.
Many people’s brains continue to operate on pre-civilized logic. They can’t really grasp that other people with greater vision are actually putting in the work to improve ourselves and our understanding of reality each generation, over what came before.
Apple should back a bill defending unborn children from being murdered by their parents. And it should back a bill defending unborn children from being murdered by Planned Parenthood (sic) so it can sell their body parts for big money. No more discrimination against innocent babies. Or does Apple just defend perversion? Lets guess.
Supreme Court decided that one forty years ago. The country has since been moving forward, the opposite direction from where you seem to want it. Apple is one of the drivers of that forward motion.
The Supreme Court upheld the right of white people to own black slaves. But then the Republican Party stood up against the Democrats and a Civil War was required to correct the evil in the Supreme Court which then upheld the Democrat insistence on slavery.
Now the Supreme Court and Democrats insist on a right for parents to kill their own children. Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood to kill unborn black babies because she considered blacks undesirable. Today’s Democrats love Margaret Sanger. Today’s Democrats worship above all sexual gratification with no responsibility. So it must believe in killing ones own children when they might interrupt the sexual gratification. People like Predrag and John Smith and KingMel worry about spotted owls but claim a right to kill a child already born in a failed abortion. And they want to even be able to make profits on the sale of the body parts of the defenseless babies they kill. We are talking about people who personify evil. They would kill their own children rather than defend them. What disgusting beings.
That text sounded like a deranged lunatic. Some of it apparently went into American politics (the ‘Republican’ vs. ‘Democratic’), but most of it made no sense whatsoever (stuff about unborn black babies, sexual gratification, sale of body parts, spotted owls…!!???).
Predrag – your earlier comments show you are not capable of making an argument. Now, every single thing I said is a historical fact. Now, you being very stupid have a hard time dealing with facts. You were probably not aware Lincoln was a Republican. You probably don’t know Martin Luther King was a Republican. You probably don’t know Hugo Black, Democrat Supreme Court nominee, was a Ku Klux Klan lawyer and Robert Byrd, recent Democrat Senate Majority Leader was a Ku Klux Klan official. Of course you are so ignorant you know nothing of Margaret Sanger who is a Democrat hero. In short, you are so stupid all you can do is rant with empty slogans someone else had put in your head. You stopped using your brain so long ago that you don’t even know how to think any longer. That makes you a perfect Democrat.
And yet again – whatever is true or not in what you say – it’s all IRRELEVANT against the simple idea that ***all citizens of the country should have equal rights***, with no regard to skin color, gender, who they find attractive, whether they smoke cigarettes, and, to bring in a few biblical abominations, whether they eat shellfish, whether they wear mixed fabrics, and whether they shave.
Lecturing vegetables is tiresome but needed.
Marriage is not a right. It is conferred on qualified parties. Therefore, its very definition involves discrimination. Now, your brain is not very discriminating so I don’t expect you to understand deep concepts, like men and women being different, or marriage being something created to perpetuate humanity. Given its purpose, marrying people of the same sex is a poor way to perpetuate anything, except a short term oversupply of fashionistas.
Deranged again. If lots of people choose not to have babies, that would be a very good thing.
Actually, marriage has lots of different definitions in the Bible, and was certainly NOT created to perpetuate humanity.
???!!!
Democrats, Republicans, Ku Klux Klan, Hugo Black, Robert Byrd, Lincoln… What on Earth are you talking about?
I thought we were discussing human rights! You seem to be obsessed with anal sex (we saw that earlier) and American domestic politics. Neither of which is related to the topic of this discussion (discrimination against LGBT persons). So, regardless of whether what you were talking about in your message is “historical fact” or not (I’ll leave that to Americans with some knowledge on the subject to determine, if anyone cares to bother), it is simply irrelevant to my arguments.
And, by the way, I am not an American (and oftentimes, when I come across Americans such as yourself, I feel blessed for that…).
Again; deranged lunatic.
You, being Predrag, don’t understand that Slavery had to do with human rights. But then you are a vegetable. If you had a brain, you would understand that marriage is not a right. Do you have the right to marry your mother? Forget that question, I forgot you don’t have a brain. Do you have the right to marry your sister? Skip it, being a Democrat Obama voter you think you do. Let me talk to your grandfather. I think if we go that far back we might find intelligence in your family.
Deranged lunatic…
Again; not an American (I wonder, what is it that makes all the deranged people so obsessed with American politics? And vegetables? Or slavery..?!).
So, you do support discrimination in murder laws and you support the murder of innocent young viable independent children. You even support the murderers being able to sell the victims parts for profit. You are disgusting.
Not hiring sickos, period. Imagine hiring asswipe Bruce Jenner. That guy is a nut case. No homoz either. Nasty, POSes.
Deep thinking by kent and his ilk:
I think transsexuals have higher suicide rates — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
Women don’t have dicks — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
Pedophiles exist — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
Allowing them to have equal rights could lead to sex with animals — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
Transgenders are mentally ill — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
I think anal intercourse is icky — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
Anal sex causes adult diaper use — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
The Supreme Court used to side with slave-owners — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
Democrats used to be right-wingers — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
I don’t agree with abortion — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights.
Tim Cook isn’t fixing everything in the world at the same time — therefore gays shouldn’t have equal rights, and Tim has no right to speak on the topic.
I don’t have the same opinion about other abominations from the bible – eating shellfish, wearing mixed fabrics, shaving. And I see no contradiction in that.