Apple Brainwashes Gay Cure App from iTunes

[blindthrall]

Is there an 'app' to cure christianity/stupidity too? I'd imagine this fellow wouldn't be very pleased if there was.

Yes because clearly having an interest in religion or spirituality is a disease. Seriously, grow up.

Having an interest in the same sex is?

Well, now that you mention it...
http://boingboing.net/2009/06/06/evolution-religion-s.html

 

[teknoarcanist]

You don't have a right not to be offended

You DO have a right to refuse service. Apple exercised theirs. Deal with it.

Apple may reserve the right to do what they want, but they have a moral obligation to respect the right to free speech and, without any government involvement mind you, permit those who may offend people to have their say.

After all, the right to free speech was meant to protect speech people didn't like. Not stuff people didn't already agree with.

No, actually, they don't, and it wasn't. Freedom of speech grants you the inherent human right to express an opinion without fear of legal or governmental recrimination. It doesn't obligate the rest of the world to accommodate, acknowledge, or disseminate your opinion, speaking both practically and morally.

You have the right to say whatever you like in my place of business without fear of being arrested -- but I have the right to ask you to leave.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Meh, I don't see any reason to call their ideas stupid. Everybody has ideas that are stupid to someone. I can understand that Apple dropped the ball though. If they got rid of this kind of stuff before and it now slipped past them then somebody wasn't minding the store.

 

[Grey_Wolf_Leader]

*snip*

Alright fine, we'll open up a dialogue.

I'm a Catholic that thinks we need major reform with the beliefs of sex. The need to create human life is different when we have overpopulation. To many human lives whens people will eventually start dying sooner or expand so much we end up causing a mass extinction.

Also there is little difference between homosexual acts and homosexuality. You said it something that someone is, there for born with it or at least can't change it, therefore made form God, who doesn't make mistakes right. So why would God create people who can not bring themselves to have sex that allows for procreation. If God wanted them to procreate him would have made them want to sex that allows for procreation. If you don't think its a disease to be fixed you shouldn't think its evil, because not having sex isn't going to make any more babies then having homosexual sex. The opinion you have contradicts it self.

Overpopulation? Really? I thought that was what research into space colonies and colonies on the Moon and Mars were about. And it is not like Europe will even be able to sustain its own population at a ~1.8 Fertility Rate...

What do you mean by no difference? Homosexuality is something rarely defined, so let me elaborate:
Homosexual feelings, like heterosexual feelings, are not immoral in of themselves. Because God created Sexuality, it is by definition sacred. It is the process by which bodies made in his image are created. Therefore the heterosexual drive to mate and reproduce is also as equally sacred.

I consider homosexual feelings to be a disorder, like a mental disorder such as Autism, the natural structure is malfunctioning. That is not immoral in of itself.
Homosexual thoughts and acts however are immoral. That is what Morality is about, the judgment of what people do and think, not what their body tells them.

How a person feels fundamentally differs from what they think or do. You have no control over what instincts your body sends to your brain. You have complete control over how you react to your instincts and how you behave in relation towards them. That is what I judge as moral or immoral.

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Freedom of speech, even if it's speech you don't agree with. Apple caving is fail.

However, free enterprise is free enterprise they have a right to deny or allow whatever they want.

 

[city cider]

Wow. WOW. religious fanatics complain about people censoring their beliefs and media en masse? How fucking ironic.

 

[blindthrall]

Well, then you believe that there is no such thing as yourself. There is no inherent reason for matter to organize itself or exist as lifeforms. The most effective form of matter is in unorganized clouds called nebulas floating meaninglessly in space. If there is no God, why would there be such a thing as life in the first place? I have hopped about on the Internet, listening to atheist after atheist, and none of them, have ever, ever given me a good reason to believe why dumb matter would have the capacity to act on its own to create life.
But we exist, therefore there must be a creator like an artist who took clay and formed man.


Even if you believe that there is no God, that does not change the reality that homosexuality does not fulfill the two basic biological purposes of sex.

1st: To procreate
2nd: To bond male and female together

There is plenty of research and plain common sense which backs this up. Homosexuality does not do these things. Why should society not have a reason to look down upon it?

Apple may reserve the right to do what they want, but they have a moral obligation to respect the right to free speech and, without any government involvement mind you, permit those who may offend people to have their say.

After all, the right to free speech was meant to protect speech people didn't like. Not stuff people didn't already agree with.

Why do the laws of physics need a reason to do anything? Without sentience, reason doesn't exist, any search for a motive before humanity is bound to end in failure. Is it really so horrible to think that there is no purpose, no reason for us to be here? I know it's quite a blow to the ego, but I find that a universe without an underlying purpose is strangely comforting. It means things aren't going wrong because there was never a way for things to go in the first place.

As far as homosexuality fulfilling a biological purpose, we do lots of things that do not make sense from a purely survivalist instinct. Maybe homosexuality is an unconscious response to overpopulation, giving people a way to vent their hormones without making more people. Hell, some animals, like bonobo chimps, are really gay. Why should sex only form bonds between men and women?

Free speech is a good point, but Apple isn't a civic institution. If they think it'll hurt sales, they have every right to pull the app. People should be able to voice their opinion that homosexuality is a disease, but if apple doesn't want to lose money to give them a soapbox, they don't have to. That's what the Internet is for.

 

[teknoarcanist]

^ Thank you.

Once again:

Free speech = "You have the right to say what you like without being arrested for it."

Free speech =! "You have the right to say what you like AND EVERYONE ELSE MUST ACCOMMODATE YOU AND LISTEN."

 

[j0frenzy]

*snip*

Alright, I accept your point of view, but would like to bring across my own. What if I believe that there is no God or divine creator. What if I believe that all of existence is just a series of random coincidences with no higher purpose. What if I believe that the creation of genders is a part of nature that humans adapted for the sake of some form of genetic diversity and that it is only to ensure the survival of the human race according to nature rather than the cause of some higher being. What if I believe that we offend only other humans when we partake in acts of sex without the intent of procreation, that cannot possibly end in procreation. Now with all those what ifs said, why are your beliefs more valid than mine?

All of that being said, I believe this app has the right to exist. It has the right to be marketed. But Apple is absolutely within their rights to remove it from their app store. Their rights are not being abridged because no government is abridging them. Apple is a private corporation who can set whatever terms they want for people who wish to sell anything on their store. Apple should not be forced to accept every app because it represents some political view. If people think Apple is too liberal and not offering enough Gay Cure apps on their store, then they should stop buying iPods and iPhones and switch to some other multimedia device.

Well, then you believe that there is no such thing as yourself. There is no inherent reason for matter to organize itself or exist as lifeforms. The most effective form of matter is in unorganized clouds called nebulas floating meaninglessly in space. If there is no God, why would there be such a thing as life in the first place? I have hopped about on the Internet, listening to atheist after atheist, and none of them, have ever, ever given me a good reason to believe why dumb matter would have the capacity to act on its own to create life.
But we exist, therefore there must be a creator like an artist who took clay and formed man.

"...Thou hast had signs enough; will ye tempt your God? Will ye say, Show unto me a sign, when ye have the testimony of all these thy brethren, and also all the holy prophets? The scriptures are laid before thee, yea, and all things denote there is a God; yea, even the earth, and call things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator." ~Alma 30:44

Even if you believe that there is no God, that does not change the reality that homosexuality does not fulfill the two basic biological purposes of sex.

1st: To procreate
2nd: To bond male and female together

There is plenty of research and plain common sense which backs this up. Homosexuality does not do these things. Why should society not have a reason to look down upon it?

Apple may reserve the right to do what they want, but they have a moral obligation to respect the right to free speech and, without any government involvement mind you, permit those who may offend people to have their say.

After all, the right to free speech was meant to protect speech people didn't like. Not stuff people didn't already agree with.

All of your philosophical talk may be true or not. That is irrelevant to the argument. My question is why is your beliefs on life and creation a valid position to legislate from? I personally am not an atheist. Far from it. But just because I believe in a God, doesn't mean I should force that belief onto other people. You say a homosexual act is wrong because it does not promote procreation. I say, or some hypothetical person says, it harms no one, so why is it wrong?
As for the matter at hand, Apple has no such obligation to anyone. Their primary motivation for existing is to make money. They have the right to cater to whatever demographics they chose and can take away their market as a soap box for whatever people whom they decide not to business with. The same reason why a site can decide to stop hosting a school shooting mod, why Microsoft can ban people from its online service for inappropriate names and content, why the Escapist can ban me for admitting to piracy. People can run into the streets and proclaim whatever nonsense they like, but companies don't have to cater to their nonsense. Free speech only applies to what the government can and cannot do to you, not as to how companies have to arbitrarily treat people.

 

[Grey_Wolf_Leader]

I agree with this app and I am not a christian.

...wait... what?

Please elaborate...

He's saying that he is a bigot.

I share the basic beliefs of the creator of this app. I believe homosexuality is sinful...

Naturally, you believe this on Biblical justification. Some of the same parts of the Bible that condemn homosexuality also instruct you to kill anyone who has beliefs different than your own (Deut 17:2-7), that you should put to death anyone who blasphemes god (Lev. 24:16), to stone anyone who gets raped and doesn't scream loud enough (Deut. 22:23-24), kill anyone who breaks the sabbath (Num. 15:32-56) etc.

So either you pick and choose which sections of the Bible are meaningful, and your idea that homosexuality is a sin is just as arbitrary as any of your beliefs, or you've got a whooooole lot of killin' to catch up on.

Ah, the old "Bible is Evil" accusation.
How do I put this? Christ explained that the law laid down in the Law of Moses was not the "Higher Law" he came to institute during his ministry. The Law of Moses was the law given because that was the law the Jews were ready for, but not the Higher Law Christ gave. The Higher Law was the original Ten Commandments Moses brought down from the mountain, but broke when he saw the Israelite worshiping an idol. He knew they were not ready for the Higher Law of the Lord, so he returned again and sought from the Lord the law which would be most appropriate for them at the time.

There is also a difference between the secular laws laid down in the Law of Moses, the laws that would be governmental in nature, and the ones which would be individual and behavioral. The Ten Commandments were the second type, but the governmental laws were the ones in Deuteronomy. These laws only applied to the ancient Israelites and the ancient government of Israel. These are not the secular laws of our modern era.

Either way, Christ fulfilled the Law of Moses, including these secular laws saying to "slay this man for blaspheming the faith" with his Atonement, Death, and Resurrection, which is why Christians do not practice it anymore. This is one of the fundamental differences between the beliefs Jews and Christians.

 

[drisky]

I consider homosexual feelings to be a disorder, like a mental disorder such as Autism, the natural structure is malfunctioning. That is not immoral in of itself.
Homosexual thoughts and acts however are immoral. That is what Morality is about, the judgment of what people do and think, not what their body tells them.

And that relives you of your contradiction, for all it tensive purposes a disorder is that needs to be fixed for the health of the person. So like a disease you should believe that the church should cure them so they can live happy and normal lives. But thats not how it works, people don't get cured of homosexuality by the power of God. So when the cure doesn't work what are they left with? They end up torn between who they are and their spirituality. And that ends up with them either stoping their believe in God or going down the road depression and suicide, and thats a bad thing.

 

[legion431]

Don't these Christians have better things to do than to tell people how bad they are for making their own decisions. I think they ought to look up thet Jesus fellow so many people have been talking about.

 

[Grey_Wolf_Leader]

*snip*

*snip*

*snip*

*snip*

*snip*

That was great. im exited that someone had an agrument with examples to back them up! you get the platinum trophy of awesome

First off my friend, you should learn to use spell check and grammar check, its not that hard, you have it right there in your comment editor.
Second, no, it is not awesome, he forgot to mention that Christ fulfilled all of those laws from the Law of Moses with his Atonement, which is why modern Christians do not practice any of them.

 

[Grey_Wolf_Leader]

You don't have a right not to be offended

You DO have a right to refuse service. Apple exercised theirs. Deal with it.

Apple may reserve the right to do what they want, but they have a moral obligation to respect the right to free speech and, without any government involvement mind you, permit those who may offend people to have their say.

After all, the right to free speech was meant to protect speech people didn't like. Not stuff people didn't already agree with.

No, actually, they don't, and it wasn't. Freedom of speech grants you the inherent human right to express an opinion without fear of legal or governmental recrimination. It doesn't obligate the rest of the world to accommodate, acknowledge, or disseminate your opinion, speaking both practically and morally.

You have the right to say whatever you like in my place of business without fear of being arrested -- but I have the right to ask you to leave.

You certainly have the right to ask me to leave, but I reserve the right to speak my peace before leaving, my friend. Or even to practice civil disobedience and refuse to leave.

I again say it is not a governmental thing. It is a personal moral obligation. Apple may own the store, but they are practicing discrimination if they do not allow people with potentially offensive views to make them known. They don't legally have to carry the app. But they are responsible for not letting someone sell their product.

Everyone should permit each other to speak freely, not because the government says so, but because as sons and daughters of God, it is their inherent right. Governments don't grant rights, God does.

"If the government can give rights, it can take them away."

 

[mikespoff]

Later, in a statement released today, Chambers further complained about his app being removed. "We are extremely disappointed to learn of Apple's decision to deny equal representation in the public square," he said. "Discrimination of thought and belief obstructs essential dialogue and authentic diversity." Chambers goes on to point out that the App Store contains all kinds of Apps dedicated to celebrating LGBT culture.

....Go fuck yourself. Really? And people wonder why I am so harsh on religion. I cant even begin to say how much this blatant hypocracy angers me! Though not nice, those words I used are a held back response.

-sigh-

Care to clarify? I'm not seeing any hypocrisy here - he supports free speech and an open forum for discussion. Where's the problem?

 

[teknoarcanist]

You don't have a right not to be offended

You DO have a right to refuse service. Apple exercised theirs. Deal with it.

Apple may reserve the right to do what they want, but they have a moral obligation to respect the right to free speech and, without any government involvement mind you, permit those who may offend people to have their say.

After all, the right to free speech was meant to protect speech people didn't like. Not stuff people didn't already agree with.

No, actually, they don't, and it wasn't. Freedom of speech grants you the inherent human right to express an opinion without fear of legal or governmental recrimination. It doesn't obligate the rest of the world to accommodate, acknowledge, or disseminate your opinion, speaking both practically and morally.

You have the right to say whatever you like in my place of business without fear of being arrested -- but I have the right to ask you to leave.

You certainly have the right to ask me to leave, but I reserve the right to speak my peace before leaving, my friend. Or even to practice civil disobedience and refuse to leave.

I again say it is not a governmental thing. It is a personal moral obligation. Apple may own the store, but they are practicing discrimination if they do not allow people with potentially offensive views to make them known. They don't legally have to carry the app. But they are responsible for not letting someone sell their product.

Everyone should permit each other to speak freely, not because the government says so, but because as sons and daughters of God, it is their inherent right. Governments don't grant rights, God does.

"If the government can give rights, it can take them away."

You um....you don't have the 'right' to practice civil disobedience.

Y'know.

Because it's engaging in activities deemed illegal?

Because it's civil fucking disobedience??

You CAN do it, sure (much like I CAN throw feces at my neighbor's window) but you don't have a legally protected 'right' to.

And why should Apple be morally obligated to disseminate material both it and its customers consider discriminatory? Isn't that impinging upon their freedom of speech? Am I obligated to carry cookies shaped like racial caricatures in my bakery just because someone walked in with a bag and asked me to sell them? Is Barnes and Noble morally obligated to sell the KKK handbook? Is a Christian bookstore morally obligated to carry books of satanist scripture?

ONCE AGAIN: As a legal, ethical, moral, and philisophical principal, 'free speech' means AND HAS ALWAYS MEANT that you have the god-given right to say what you want without being arrested or killed for it. It DOESN'T mean anyone else has to listen, and it SURE AS HELL doesn't mean a business must or even should carry your product and espouse your views if it doesn't wish to.

 

[Saikonate]

Ah, the old "Bible is Evil" accusation.

The book itself isn't evil, it's just filled with absurdities, and directives to do that which I would argue is certainly evil.

How do I put this? Christ explained that the law laid down in the Law of Moses was not the "Higher Law" he came to institute during his ministry. The Law of Moses was the law given because that was the law the Jews were ready for, but not the Higher Law Christ gave. The Higher Law was the original Ten Commandments Moses brought down from the mountain, but broke when he saw the Israelite worshiping an idol. He knew they were not ready for the Higher Law of the Lord, so he returned again and sought from the Lord the law which would be most appropriate for them at the time.

There is also a difference between the secular laws laid down in the Law of Moses, the laws that would be governmental in nature, and the ones which would be individual and behavioral. The Ten Commandments were the second type, but the governmental laws were the ones in Deuteronomy. These laws only applied to the ancient Israelites and the ancient government of Israel. These are not the secular laws of our modern era.

God instructed moses to create new, identical tablets after Moses shattered the first two. You're slathering interpretation onto what is actually written about, and the "they weren't ready for the higher law" explanation is an awfully thin explanation given that the second set of commandments was created immediately after.

Assuming I buy that explanation, then the Ten Commandments are all that we should be concerned about, and the Ten Commandments don't mention homosexuality at any point. Interpreting "adultery" to mean homosexuality is again injecting your own interpretation to what is actually there.

So I'll go ahead and just accept that the laws of Deuteronomy don't apply now for whatever reason. That raises more questions though. Even if that is the case, stoning anyone who is raped in the city and doesn't call out loud enough to be heard is an evil and wrong thing no matter who told you to do it or what society it applied to. It's like saying "yeah, people had slaves in the 1800s, but that was just the time." It doesn't matter what the law said, it was still wrong. How on earth can you be comfortable deriving your morality from the same supreme being that told his followers to murder anyone who thought differently than they did? In what context is that ever just? I'm not asking you to quote me scripture here, because it doesn't matter what the scripture says. Think with the brain god allegedly gave you. Any way you slice it, that's wrong.

Either way, Christ fulfilled the Law of Moses, including these secular laws saying to "slay this man for blaspheming the faith" with his Atonement, Death, and Resurrection, which is why Christians do not practice it anymore. This is one of the fundamental differences between the beliefs Jews and Christians.

Again, if the law of Moses is fulfilled and the Ten Commandments are all that matters, homosexuality is a-okay.

 

[Saelune]

Later, in a statement released today, Chambers further complained about his app being removed. "We are extremely disappointed to learn of Apple's decision to deny equal representation in the public square," he said. "Discrimination of thought and belief obstructs essential dialogue and authentic diversity." Chambers goes on to point out that the App Store contains all kinds of Apps dedicated to celebrating LGBT culture.

....Go fuck yourself. Really? And people wonder why I am so harsh on religion. I cant even begin to say how much this blatant hypocracy angers me! Though not nice, those words I used are a held back response.

-sigh-

Care to clarify? I'm not seeing any hypocrisy here - he supports free speech and an open forum for discussion. Where's the problem?

When Christians beg for tolerance whole promoting bigotted views of others, usually LGBT people, it just angers me due to the hypocracy of it. Asking for what you wont give. Christians tend to be one of the top discriminators of thought and belief, so to hear one who clearly is not so open-minded be mad at getting back what he gives pisses me off.