Thursday, April 2, 2015

Boycott Apple

I am a defacto boycotter of Apple Corporation. I don't like dictators of any stripe. Now I am a cultural and moral boycotter of Apple Corporation, because Apple's Gay CEO hates religious freedom, which is the foundation of the nation that feeds and nourishes him. The Apple hypocrisy is documented: Apple has stores in countries that BEHEAD GAYS, yet condemns religious freedom laws in the USA. There could be nothing more evil, in my opinion.
The overblown hypocrisy of Tim Cook's business boycott of Indiana

"Indiana Gov. Mike Pence (R) vowed on Tuesday to "clarify and fix" the state's new Religious Freedom and Restoration Act, after major corporations threatened to boycott the state. These businesses — and many caterwauling progressives — claim that the law gives religiously inclined business owners a "license to discriminate," especially against gay customers.

But here's the thing: It would be deeply ironic if these national and multinational companies were able to wield their right to do business with whomever they pleased (in this case, by boycotting Indiana) in a way that took away the same right of Indiana businesses.

So what's to be done? Well, instead of tinkering with a perfectly legitimate law, Pence should simply strengthen gay rights."
Gays have the right to seek out gay wedding services. It's odd that they never try to abuse Muslim wedding services - well, not odd at all; they are bullies and bullies are cowards.

Gays now delight in bullying Christian small business owners with the full force of federal hate crime laws, laws designed specifically to discriminate against thought crimes and moral positions. The Gay/Federal complex uses "anti-discrimination" as a pseudo-moral sledge as it discriminates against Christians who have Christian businesses designed for Christian customers. Failure to bow to the Gay/Federal complex and its faux moral outrage because gays are not given Christian services at their pagan rituals results in the destruction of the Christian business and its owners. The "Gaystapo" is in full bloom under federal protection and federal persecution of religion.

When a homosexual CEO of a major corporation starts using his power in discriminating against Christians even while supporting overt Islamic abuse, it is time to boycott that corporation. It's not like there are not other good product sources. Apple itself is more than a corporation, it is a subculture, one without any actual moral principles... except those which are self-satisfying.

From Kevin D. Williamson:
"The people who have hijacked the name “liberal” — the étatists — always win when social questions are decided by the state rather than in private life, because the expansion of the state, and the consequent diminution of private life, is their principal objective. The self-styled progressive sets himself in rhetorical opposition to Big Business, but the corporate manager often suffers from the same fatal conceit as the economic étatist — an unthinking, inhumane preference for uniformity, consistency, regimentation, and conformity. It is no surprise to see Apple and Walmart joining forces here against the private mind. There is a reason that the atmosphere and protocols of the corporate human-resources office are a great deal like those of the junior-high vice-principal’s office: All reeducation facilities have a little something in common.

The ancient rival to étatism in the Western world is the church militant, both in its formal institutional expression and in the relatively newfangled (and thoroughly American) choose-your-own-adventure approach to Christianity. For the culture warrior, bringing these nonconformists to heel is a strategic priority. Gay couples contemplating nuptials are not just happening into cake shops and florists with Christian proprietors — this is an organized campaign to bring the private mind under political discipline, to render certain moral dispositions untenable. Like Antiochus and the Jews, the game here is to “oblige them to partake of the sacrifices” and “adopt the customs” of the rulers. We are not so far removed in time as we imagine: Among the acts intended to Hellenize the Jews was a ban on circumcision, a proposal that is still very much alive in our own time, with authorities in several European countries currently pressing for that prohibition.

“I expect to die in bed,” Francis Eugene Cardinal George famously remarked. “My successor will die in prison, and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.” Perhaps it will not come to that. But we already are on the precipice of sending men with guns to the homes and businesses of bakers to enforce compliance with dictates undreamt-of the day before yesterday."


Steve Hane said...

Your argument that big organizations should not dwell into the realm of private belief and lives, as much as practical, is a very good one. I add "as much as practical" because we do need some intervention to prevent small organizations and individuals from dwelling into the private lives and beliefs of others. Your right to religious freedom does not give you the right to interfere with my right to religious freedom. Here is the careful line that government must balance on. In this particular instance no one is sure what this law does or what it's intents are.

The intent first and foremost should be no discrimination is all things. We have many protected classes, but the sexual orientation class is slowly being added causing great consternation among many who believe that protecting this class then puts their protected religious class at risk. I don't believe that the protections of one class should be able to interfere with the protections of another. Unless of course one class believes that another protected class shouldn't exist.

No one should delight in antagonizing others, but I have no doubt there is a minority that does that. It brings to mind the cases of housing discrimination of decades past. Still today there are testers who will call in on ads for real estate for rent that will see if they can get someone to violate the FHA anti discrimination rules.

Anti discrimination legislation is not designed to change your minds or beliefs, but rather to allow others to not be discriminated based on their situation.

I see a lot of people that talk about Christianity as if it is one set of beliefs. As if there is some great divide between those that are and are not Christian. The reality is that it is a continuum of belief, and along that continuum are many tents. Some of these tents are big, some not so much. There are the Roman Catholics, Baptist, Eastern Orthodox, United Methodists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Pentecostals, and many more. I see 35 churches ranging from about 50 million to 25,000 on a list of denominations for the U.S. alone. These many millions of people would all likely call themselves Christians, but I would guess their individual beliefs would vary widely. I would name myself among them with the caveat that I do not attend a church, mostly out of the desire to keep my beliefs my own. I find little indication that most churches encourage personal exploration of beliefs, but rather an open and willing desire to accept their interpretation of scripture as the word of god. Faith is an individual expression and one shared directly with God, not one that should be dictated by a group of people regardless of size. I thought that was the gist of the Protestant Reformation that gave birth to much of this diversity of Christian practice.

A very common human practice is to seek out comfort and conformity in behavior, which is why religion and government are both powerfully attractive forces in our lives. But it is best when we question both regularly in an attempt to keep them balanced and our lives not carried away by the currents of chaos.

Stan said...

I understand your points, I think, and I disagree with a couple of them.

First, there should be no protected classes, period. Protection of designated favored classes is discriminatory, and because anti-discrimination is the primary moral tenet of the Atheo-Left, classes should be erased as thought crime under their moral statement.

But that is not what the AtheoLeft actually does. They perpetuate the separation of classes by defining them and institutionalizing them - some for favoring, others for demonizing. And the Others For Demonizing include everyone and anyone who dissents from their Class Warfare, their Class definitions, their Class entitlement for the favored and disenfranchisement for the unfavored. In short, they are totalitarian in deciding whether you fall into a specified class which must have its "rights" unblemished by having to respect the rights of the others, or whether you fall into a class which must bow before other classes at the sacrifice of your own rights. The discrimination between these designated classes is obvious and palpable.

This is shown easily by viewing the interview with Sally Kohn, whose business cannot be impacted in the same manner that Christian businesses can and are.

And the point that not all christians believe the same things in the same way has no bearing on the fact some Christians do have firm beliefs, driven biblically - whether the Left or the law care to believe that or not. So forcing some people to violate their beliefs in order not to inconvenience a Protected Class from finding a compatible business, is acceptable to the Class War Mongers... those whose hatred of religion stems from their own personal viewpoint renders them as superior, as Messiah Class dominators of social prescription, regardless of US Constitutional wording OR intent.

The real issue here is who will dictate what to whom. And whether that will continue to be allowed.

No one dictates that AtheoLeftists and homosexuals MUST get their cakes from Christian bakers. The dictates are from the AtheoLeftists and homosexuals: Christian Bakers MUST violate their beliefs OR get out of business for the convenience of the AtheoLeftist homosexuals (actually to validate their power over dissent).

Stan said...

Sally Kohn interview:

Stan said...

Final thought: The AtheoLeftist homosexual stampede to discriminate against a pizza place which has not discriminated perfectly demonstrates the cultural hypocrisy involved in the drive to normalize and lionize sexual deviancy in all its forms.

That discrimination is of the Alinsky form of "cloaked with morality", a morality which is a lie: anti-discrimination by overt discrimination and demonizing.

That irrationality is no barrier to the AtheoLeftists and homosexuals who have no firm or fixed morality - only the Will To Power, using whatever tactics work at the moment.

yonose said...

I really miss Steve Job's administrative genius...

What I dislike more, is people who do not understand sexual fluidity, and discrimination arises, from every side. Non-essentialist-type of politics. Gotta love them.

It is always sad to find that so many people live, under so many premises, which are not thoroughly evaluated by themselves.

It seems like some sort of a degenerative-neuro-linguistic programming.

Affected individuals tend to have projective behaviors and are pretty much self-centered.

Such a process begins as always has been shown, with family cores which have strong dysfunctional characteristics regarding behavioral aspects, and sadly, it also happens when extraordinarily violent events happen to any of the parents, even if there's no fault within any of them.

Kind Regards.