Apple won't do it because it believes Russia is bluffing.
If the US did not have nuclear missiles and Russia had nuked countries before for not running outside and dancing naked then yes I would call you a prude if you were willing to risk the lives of 300+ million people to not dance outside naked.
I have no idea what that question has to do with climate change advocacy.
Since you are confused at what I'm getting at, I'll explain.
You seem to think "What if someone feels so strongly about a woman's right to choose they are willing to see the world burn?" is a reasonable way to frame the issue.
So then I presented the same framing scenario involving nudity and you instinctively refused to accept the framing writing "Apple won't do it because it believes Russia is bluffing."
Your framing did not in any way involve what climate change advocates "believe" about their opponents. Considerations of bluffing were not part of your evaluation of choices available to climate change advocates.
When someone presents a hypothetical scenario in a wacky, no relation to the real world matter, sometimes the reasonable thing is to reject the hypothetical. As you just did, when you wrote "Apple won't do it because it believes Russia is bluffing".
There's also the fact that your framing requires us to label Apple employees as fanatics rather than the guy who is planning to nuke the planet unless Apple employees dance around naked, which is very weird.
Economics has a concept called "revealed preferences" which is the idea that you can better understand what someone values by what they do as opposed to what they say.
So in a scenario where someone says "climate change is an existential threat" but then acts like it's just one among many issues they care about reveals what they actually believe about climate change.
The problem with your scenario is doesn't reveal anyone's preferences because the threat isn't believable. However if the threat is believable than that does reveal their preferences about the end of the world vs being naked. And I don't mention Putin fanaticism because the entire scenario is not about Putin, Putin is a device to illustrate a choice Apple and their employees would need to make. Just like how if someone asks about the maintenance schedule of the trolly car in the typical trolly car problem they're missing the point.
If the US did not have nuclear missiles and Russia had nuked countries before for not running outside and dancing naked then yes I would call you a prude if you were willing to risk the lives of 300+ million people to not dance outside naked.
I have no idea what that question has to do with climate change advocacy.