Apple Rejects Sacrilegious iPhone App
- Thread starter The_root_of_all_evil
- Start date
Yea.. Remember those cartoons of Mohamed? While any insult to Christianity is usually taken with the other cheek turned, at the risk of being sued, Apple is quite within it's rights to ban this one. I'm a Christian, and see nothing wrong with personal taste, even if it would be deemed blasphemy, but from Apples P.O.V., better safe than sorry.
Leviticus banned several animals with good reason that you'd know if your general knowledge was higher. Pigs for all time have been ripe with disease, nothing that will kill them, just anyone who ate them if they weren't cooked properly. Worms are a major threat, and back in the days of the Egyptian empire, not as easily treatable compared to now. Banning the eating of them is a good way of ensuring a healthy population, as is enforcing a day of rest. Homosexuality has been shown to drastically increase the likelihood of contracting certain diseases, and in some cases you won't get them any other way. Banning that means that AIDs isn't an issue.
This may seem weird, but the violence in the Bible generally isn't told to little kids. Yes, the story of David vs Goliath gets a show, but not till 10 or more, and the grisly details are always left out. The Three Little Pigs are more violent than all stories you'll find told from the Bible to little kids. =P
You do realize that atheism is a religion itself, right? My religion is that I believe in Jesus, yours is that you believe in nothing. =P If you professed to be unsure of which religion, then that would be understandable. Atheism is simply sitting on the fence taken to extreme levels.
Logically silly btw, but that's just my P.O.V..
Ouch. That's a rather encompassing statement. Care to expand upon it?Kiutu said:
Actually, from a purely theological point of view, Catholicism != Christianity. Christians pray to Jesus, Catholics to Mary who is considered to be a mere human by Christians, now dead and buried.Karyuu said:-Ms- Karyuu, thank youIt would be enough to use my nickname alone.
While the second of the Ten Commandments prohibits "graven images," the Catholic Church is one of the best examples of a segment of Christianity that is absolutely crawling with images and carvings of saints, apostles, and Jesus. One.
Leviticus gives some excellent examples of contradictions, most notable the condemning of homosexuality and the eating of certain animals that have never declined in popularity. Two.
The bible is ripe with violence that, were it displayed in secular media (as it often is), Christian parents would frantically hurry to shield their children from seeing. Three.
And so on, and so forth.
As for "choosing" bigotry (what a fascinating case of misinterpretation), I simply "choose" not to go along with all the various bull religion (or its prominent leaders) try to pull, nor the world's attempt to soothe their disgruntled little hearts when someone steps on their toes. They're all big boys and girls, and they can handle someone disagreeing with them without crying to mommy and crying threats of hell.
They can, can't they?
Leviticus banned several animals with good reason that you'd know if your general knowledge was higher. Pigs for all time have been ripe with disease, nothing that will kill them, just anyone who ate them if they weren't cooked properly. Worms are a major threat, and back in the days of the Egyptian empire, not as easily treatable compared to now. Banning the eating of them is a good way of ensuring a healthy population, as is enforcing a day of rest. Homosexuality has been shown to drastically increase the likelihood of contracting certain diseases, and in some cases you won't get them any other way. Banning that means that AIDs isn't an issue.
This may seem weird, but the violence in the Bible generally isn't told to little kids. Yes, the story of David vs Goliath gets a show, but not till 10 or more, and the grisly details are always left out. The Three Little Pigs are more violent than all stories you'll find told from the Bible to little kids. =P
You do realize that atheism is a religion itself, right? My religion is that I believe in Jesus, yours is that you believe in nothing. =P If you professed to be unsure of which religion, then that would be understandable. Atheism is simply sitting on the fence taken to extreme levels.
Logically silly btw, but that's just my P.O.V..
Private company?
Is there a law restricting the creation of religious icons? (who the hell is selling all those crucifixes anyway?)
Is there a law restricting the creation of religious icons? (who the hell is selling all those crucifixes anyway?)
I don't know about the iphone or the apps or how the apple store works, but I'm guessing Apple are just doing the sensible thing in not wanting to be seen 'making a fast buck ridiculing Jesus', as that's not good press.
However, if free apps are allowed to be run on the iphone, and it was released free, blaming Apple for it, would be like blaming microsoft for 2 girls 1 cup based on it being hosted on a windows server (maybe it's linux or unix, if you want me to do internet research on THAT site, you can bugger off), and therefore exactly what would happen...damn. I nearly had a point there and then the likes of FOX and the Daily Mail went and ruined it
However, if free apps are allowed to be run on the iphone, and it was released free, blaming Apple for it, would be like blaming microsoft for 2 girls 1 cup based on it being hosted on a windows server (maybe it's linux or unix, if you want me to do internet research on THAT site, you can bugger off), and therefore exactly what would happen...damn. I nearly had a point there and then the likes of FOX and the Daily Mail went and ruined it
As a Christian speaking, I'm still all for not censoring these things because of religious offense.
We could certainly start in other places for that.
We could certainly start in other places for that.
Well it seems like a good app but why keep the stcok images exclusively religious. They could've included a wide range of stock photographs and dubbed it a new kind of facelifting program for Iphone. And I suppose the reason apple banned it is because for all the people who probably use it to make quirky, satirical takes on religion there'd be a thousand morons posting pictures of their butts or the middle finger in favour of Jesus' face, or any deity for that matter.
I actually think the name of the app is more offensive than the app itself, since it can be construed as likening Jesus and other holy figures to a Vietnamese prostitute.
I can easilly see why that app was rejected though, since your face isn't the only body part you could easily place onto Jesus...
I expect with that app and a history book you could easily put Hitler's face onto a Jewish holy figure too, and what with the wireless file sharing and printing apps on the iPhone, anyone with that app could easily make flyers of "****face Jesus" or "Jewdolf Hitler" and antagonise hundreds of people in a matter of minutes.
Also, isn't a lot of that religious iconography owned by their respective churches, or are they totally public domain?
I can easilly see why that app was rejected though, since your face isn't the only body part you could easily place onto Jesus...
I expect with that app and a history book you could easily put Hitler's face onto a Jewish holy figure too, and what with the wireless file sharing and printing apps on the iPhone, anyone with that app could easily make flyers of "****face Jesus" or "Jewdolf Hitler" and antagonise hundreds of people in a matter of minutes.
Also, isn't a lot of that religious iconography owned by their respective churches, or are they totally public domain?
Ok wow this company couldnt be more american could it? it wont allow an app that might be against their religion, but an app that helps snipers kill people, thats completely moraly acceptable :S
