Posted on 03/31/2015 9:26:51 AM PDT by Kaslin
"There's something very dangerous happening in states across the country," Apple chief executive Tim Cook warned Monday in a Washington Post opinion piece against Indiana's newly passed Religious Freedom Restoration Act. It matters not to the corporate big shot that President Bill Clinton signed a federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 1993 (which current House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi supported) or that then-Illinois state Sen. Barack Obama voted for a similar law in 1998.
It was one thing for Democrats to support religious freedom when there was no downside to standing up for the devout. Today there could be a cost. An Indiana baker might refuse to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple and cite the new law if the couple were to sue him or her. Cook believes that such discrimination would be "bad for business." I agree. Cook also believes that the baker wouldn't have the right to say no. I do not agree with that.
When Obama first ran for the White House, he supported a ban on same-sex marriage. If Cook had a problem with Obama's stand, he kept it to himself. Years later, Obama announced that his position had evolved and he had come to support same-sex marriage. Voila: Now anyone who disagrees with same-sex marriage is a bigot and thus has no rights.
Except religious dissenters do have rights. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court recognized that family-owned corporations have religious rights. In the 5-4 Hobby Lobby decision, the big bench recognized CEO David Green's right to get around an Affordable Care Act mandate that his employer-sponsored health plan offer employees contraceptives that, Green argued, "risk killing an embryo."
Last year, federal court rulings legalized same-sex marriage in Indiana. In a more tolerant world, the court rulings would leave gay couples free to marry and religious dissenters free to not cater same-sex weddings. Each side would win the right to be true to itself.
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, was no profile in courage when he appeared Sunday on ABC's "This Week." Host George Stephanopoulos repeatedly asked Pence whether the law he signed last week would allow a florist to refuse to serve a gay couple at their wedding. "Yes or no?" Stephanopoulos asked. Pence would not give a simple answer -- that a florist could use the new law if a gay couple were to sue him.
Pence did ask, "Is tolerance a two-way street or not?" The answer from corporate boardrooms appears to be "not."
Pence -- who may be thinking of running for the White House himself -- obviously sees powerful forces aligned against him. Angie's List announced it was stopping a major project in Indianapolis. Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff tweeted, "We are canceling all programs that require our customers/employees to travel to Indiana to face discrimination." (The Federalist's Mollie Hemingway was amused that Benioff stood up to Indiana while doing business with China, a bastion of human rights abuses.)
"Opposing discrimination takes courage," Cook wrote. He has the Democratic Party, some Republicans, Hollywood and CEO-dom on his side -- and they completely outgun true believers who oppose same-sex marriage. They're not standing up to China; they're standing up to Hoosier Christian florists. They think they're brave when they're rank bullies for whom it's not enough to win; they have to make dissenters buckle.
Et tu, Debra?
it’s perfectly fine for a PRIVATELY HELD company to decide who they make their services and products available to.
but... PUBLICLY HELD corporations do not have that luxury. this is the price of going public.
mr cook... you seem to be the ceo of a publicly held corporation. as such, you cannot legally withhold your company’s products or services from paying customers for any reason (other then nonpayment).
promoting an attack on a VERY large segment of the public is also a very bad business move.
Not only are sodomite agenda pushers bullies, but they’re cowards who only found their spine because they have the rich and powerful in their corner.
Can a Christian rock group prevent the Hillary campaign from playing their songs at her political rallies?
If not, how is it any different than Neil Young, Radiohead, Bon Jovi, Bruce Springsteen, etc. prohibiting Republican candidates from using their songs at rallies?
Ann Coulter pointed out yesterday on Sean that this compelled service by the government opens the door for ending the Priest/Penitent privilege, Conscientious Objector status and many/all other legal exemptions made on religious grounds.
And Indiana’s law is softer than Ohio’s and exactly matches the one agreed to by obozo himself.
The gloves are off.
Another reason I avoid using Apple products even though I realize Bill Gates is almost as bad. There are more alternatives for open source products such as Oracle in Windows format.
The second to the last paragraph seems to contain the take away line, where it says, “...powerful forces are aligned against him”.
This absurd reaction to the legislation may be based on cutting Pence out of a prez run as much as it is about stepping on the legislation. This is not to say that religious liberty is not in jeopardy, but this over the top business/sports complex reaction is pants on fire weird.
Standing for Biblical values takes more.
So if a member of Westboro Baptist Church walks into a gay signmaker’s shop and orders a sign that says “God Hates Fags”, the signmaker has to make the sign, right?
BINGO!
We loved the open architecture of the PC, within one year we were dealers and had added a 5 mb hard drive to one of the drive bays and upgraded the ram. Everyone said, What in the world will you do with 5 megs of hard drive space?
I wonder if these sanctimonious liberals who are so anxious to force Christian florists to make gay flower arrangements would be equally anxious to force Muslim printers to make 1000 copies of a Mohammad cartoon?
Thank you. I agree with you.
As long as the person holds ans ascap locense and pays the appropriate fees, you can’t stop them from using the song. You can ask they refrain from using it, but they don’t have to stop.
I just received the following email from an old and dear friend who taught school back when teaching school meant the “Three R’s” and DID NOT include Marxist political correctness indoctrination. I pass it along as possible food for thought for those of us who grasp the “end game” of this perniciously pestilential process.
“Dick, on this ‘Freedom of Religion’ law:
I think most people get the word ‘religion’ confused in their thinking——we have many people here of other religions.
If their religion required them to close their business at sundown and there were people of other faiths who wanted to do business with them, would they have to open for those who want to do business with them?
Dick, where is the country that I once lived in many, many years ago?
Mary”
To which I replied:
Mary, The country in which you and I grew up has been hijacked by a consortium of lownoinfo voters (thank you government schools and the Marxists now running them) and venal, self-serving politicians who believe that if they either remain silent to the ongoing “transformation” (much of the GOP) or aid and abet the process (ALL the Dems who are now indistinguishable from the Stalinists who captured Russia), they will be elevated to princes in the new regime.
Ernst Rohm and the others who assisted Hitler in his conquest of Germany held similar beliefs. He was rewarded with a bullet in the head in a prison cell. His associates died in “The Night of the Long Knives”, the lucky ones killed outright, the unlucky ones slowly strangled hanging from hooks like so many butchered cattle.
What these current fools and accomplices of this new tyranny fail to understand is that the history of tyranny is filled with such stories. The tyrant will not tolerate the existence of ANY groups or individuals who might come to threaten his tyranny.
“ALL men lose when freedom fails and good men rot in filthy jails. And those who cried “Appease, appease” are HANGED by those they sought to please.”
Love to you and yours as we enter perhaps the most dangerous 660 days in our lifetime.
Dick
“it’s perfectly fine for a PRIVATELY HELD company to decide who they make their services and products available to”
Not in Washington State.
and that’s the problem
an artist creating a painting is protected by the first amendment.
so is a journalist sitting at their desk.
why? because their work is an expression of their existence.
similarly, the act of flipping burgers by a fast food cook is also protected as his life’s expression.
the expression doesn’t have to be political... it’s the result of a person’s actions. this also protects the person against slavery, as their expertise is theirs to do with as they wish and not for others to command.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.