[folklore]

This may well have been a principled stand on Apple's part. But there's a fair amount of pragmatism here too.

The best places to work - the top of the heap in any field - do everything they can do attract and retain the best people for the job. And since some of the best people are gay, it makes sense for companies to be gay-friendly. If California is a hospitable place for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, that's a selling point when Apple tries to recruit the best employees.

[batchtaster]

As soon as they posted the notice on HotNews, I knew there would be haters sending hate mail to Apple.

That's why I sent them a thank you through their feedback page. You have to remember to thank and support people who you agree with, not just respond to those you disagree with.

[randombob]

You, uh, must have missed the "Judge not, lest ye be judged" thing a few posts above. In fact, you must have missed MY prior post too, as well as all the other myriad posts explaining to you, the feeble-minded bigots, that EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL has to apply to ALL for it to be equal.

Look up "Equal" in the dictionary. And then, do some history research, and discover that - GASP!! - America was formed by people trying to get away from those who would tell them what they have to believe, or else. And then maybe see that you yourself are sort of the epitome of everything that we say America is fundamentally against.

And then sort yourself out.

[rfmansfield]

I don't care for businesses taking sides on political issues. I'd prefer Apple not spend the money for or against the issue. All it says to me is that they have too much money on their hands.

[batchtaster]

Apple are flush with money because they are doing good things business-wise. $100,000 is actually not a great deal of money considering Apple's rather expansive coffers at present (did you read their report for the last quarter?). But it will make a difference to the cause. And instead of simply taking from the community, they are trying to contribute back as well.

Microsoft and Bill Gates have been doing it for years.

[randombob]

rfmansfield said:

I don't care for businesses taking sides on political issues. I'd prefer Apple not spend the money for or against the issue. All it says to me is that they have too much money on their hands.

Part of me can agree with that. After all, isn't Apple's basic existence centered around making beautiful objects that work beautifully? And money spent this month on "No on 8" campaigns is money not invested back into R&D.

The other part of me is happy that Apple is taking a stand for civil rights. If things like this are allowed to pass ? if we are not able to see through this "Sanctity of Marriage" smokescreen and we allow classes of citizens to start being legally discriminated against ? where does it end?

Part of that end might be with the persecution of a large part of Apple's a) user base, b) potential consumers, c) their own intelligent employee pool, and d) potential employee pool.

In a way, they ARE doing this to protect themselves.

[Thermo]

I won't buy another Apple product. I don't want profits made from my purchases going to a political cause. I don't care which side they donated to - they shouldn't be donating money to any. If Job's felt strongly about the issue, he should have donated HIS own money. I have lost all respect for Steve - using other peoples' money and not his own.

[k2director]

@ Dssstrkl: "The fewer hateful bigots using Macs, the better. Hopefully Rush will be trading his MacPros for a Dell Drono on Wednesday."

I've noticed there's an ugly tendency in your camp to paint anyone who tries to reserve the term "marriage" for a man and woman as "hateful bigots" and, that's really out of line. I know a lot of people who are voting No on 8 and a lot who are voting Yes on 8, but of the ones voting "Yes," none could be remotely described as hateful or biggots. The fact is, a lot of good people in the country do have what are called "traditional values", and they feel those values are under assault, and are trying to preserve them. That doesn't make them evil, hateful, discriminatory, or anything of the sort.

I'm sure there are some people in the "Yes on 8" camp who simply dislike gays, and those attitudes are abhorrent. But the "No on 8" camp also has its members whose attitudes are pretty intolerant and ugly...

[randombob]

k2director said:

@ Dssstrkl: "The fewer hateful bigots using Macs, the better. Hopefully Rush will be trading his MacPros for a Dell Drono on Wednesday."

I've noticed there's an ugly tendency in your camp to paint anyone who tries to reserve the term "marriage" for a man and woman as "hateful bigots" and, that's really out of line. I know a lot of people who are voting No on 8 and a lot who are voting Yes on 8, but of the ones voting "Yes," none could be remotely described as hateful or biggots. The fact is, a lot of good people in the country do have what are called "traditional values", and they feel those values are under assault, and are trying to preserve them. That doesn't make them evil, hateful, discriminatory, or anything of the sort.

I'm sure there are some people in the "Yes on 8" camp who simply dislike gays, and those attitudes are abhorrent. But the "No on 8" camp also has its members whose attitudes are pretty intolerant and ugly...

No I can see the "hateful bigots" thing being about right. Hey, I prefer traditional values, as well.

But not to the extent that I would knowingly create legislation that DISCRIMINATES, against ANYONE. because, as I and others have pointed out, f you allow discrimination, you open yourself up to be discriminated against as well.

Bigot. Look it up in your Apple Heritage Dictionary. Then follow the link to "Zealot," and read the note there about bigotry.

It fits.

[TxTom]

I'm afraid I'm with you on this one. I was already looking at alternatives to Apple hardware in our server space when this came down the pike. Upon my recommendation, we've begun the move to Linux and open-source. We weren't using any Apple specific services on the hardware we have, so it's not a difficult choice...just one of loyalty. And with the taking of this stance, my loyalty took a big hit.
My employer would never take a public stance on something of this magnitude for the respect of the customers and their individual opinions.

I was in the position to begin to move our desktops from XP to Mac...we're in a good spot for the transition...but as long as I'm the one making the recommendations, it won't happen. We'll continue on our corporate license until either W7 makes good or a Linux desktop fills the need.

We're not a huge shop, but we are customers nonetheless. I've already moved collaboration services to open source and it's just the matter of setting up LAMP and OSX is done. And our 95 desktops will remain Redmond slaves or we'll go Linux.

Jobs and Apple have a right to support who they want. And so do I.

[Rhywun]

Quote

I don't want profits made from my purchases going to a political cause.

Every company does it. This cause is simply more controversial than many.

Quote

they feel those values are under assault, and are trying to preserve them

Values change. If you're not ready, that's fine. Apple (and other companies) have clearly decided that the time is right, and that supporting this cause isn't going to hurt the bottom line.

[HandyMac]

The problem is that equal rights is not what the gay lobby is after. What they want is the same special privileges married people get vs. unmarried people. If they really wanted EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL, they would insist that the government get out of the business of defining marriage, or any other human relationship, so those relationships could revert to the private, personal lives of the people where they belong. So long as the government is defining "marriage", its definition will be forced on everyone, and one group or another will be offended.

Which is why politicians love to get people riled up about such inconsequential non-issues -- because then nobody will notice that they're robbing us blind and enslaving us.

Remember Zbigniew Brzezinski? He was National Security Adviser to President Jimmy Carter. Then, after various other activities (busy man, Zbig), he was foreign policy adviser to Senator John McCain in the 2000 election. Nothing if not flexible, ol' Zbig. Nowadays he's sort of retired, I guess, but his two sons are carrying on their father's legacy, good boys that they are. Mark is foreign policy adviser to Barack Obama. What about his other son, Ian? Well, Ian's no slouch, he's keeping busy too: he's is foreign policy adviser to John McCain. Great how young men willing to work can find employment these days, huh?

Think you've got a choice tomorrow?

[celiawessen]

The content of Prop 8 is not the issue. Apple, as a corporate citizen is shooting down every single future bill that may arise out of Prop 8, if it passes. Apple has no real political or religious agenda to kill Prop 8. It's in it for the money. By maintaing the rights that people already have, Apple is ensuring that they can continue in their daily routine in personnel and human resource practices. Apple wants to keep the doors open, not for gay and lesbian couples, but for itself to be able to offer same-sex benefits without being hindered by that State. This is Apple's way of telling us, consumers and shareholders alike, that they are not going to lie down even for the state of California to change their way of doing business.

[Maya]

I am a born again Christian. I like Apple products because they work, and since I've used Amiga, as well as Windows computers since 3.1, I appreciate the difference. I also believe that Apple has the perfect right to invest in the No to 8 campaign.
Why? God gave us free will -- the will to obey Him, and the will to disobey Him. Disobedience is sin. Homosexuality is disobedience to His law. But God did not insist that political entities should promulgate sinlessness, because sinlessness cannot be promulgated; it has to be nurtured and grown in a state of complete belief in and surrender to His Son Jesus.
The only responsibility of political entities is to keep order in society -- to stop people from killing, exploiting, and oppressing each other. Homosexuality becomes a threat to a political entity only if it leads to these.
It is rather the responsibility of those who believe in God, and in His divine order, to reach out to those who are in sin, and convince them, through their lives if not through argument, that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and only He can help them. Taking over the functions of government does not give them the right to promulgate sinlessness.
Hurrah to Apple for seeing the difference.