
Apple Finds Christianity Offensive To Large Groups of People, Removes App - hachiya
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/apple-finds-christianity-offensive-to-large-groups-of-people-removes-app
======
pzxc
"The Manhattan Declaration is an ecumenical document promoting traditional
marriage, the sanctity of human life and religious liberty. It’s been signed
by almost 500,000 people and is extremely civil and respectful in language."

"Traditional marriage" is nothing but a euphemism disguising a belief about
what other people should or shouldn't do. "The sanctity of human life" is
nothing but a euphemism disguising a belief about what other people should or
shouldn't do. Neither has much to do with liberty. Using euphemisms may make
your language respectful but it doesn't change your intent. Use four-letter
words if you want and I won't blink an eye, but try to tell people who they
can or cannot marry (and thus receive unequal protection of the law) and we
will have a problem no matter how you couch your words.

------
jswinghammer
I'm a follower of Jesus and take God pretty seriously and I can't find the
energy to care about something like this. This sort of thing always strike me
as a way to say "We're the good religious people and we believe X and we know
we're the good people because we believe X." That's a bunch of crap.

If you read Paul's letter to the Romans his main argument seems to be that
thinking being an insider is what makes you better is a path you don't want to
be on. He goes to great lengths to show that just knowing what's right is
meaningless because it's going to lead to judging people and feeling superior.
To put it another way you could say the Christian point of view on this sort
of thing is that "If you consider yourself superior to one person God
considers you worse than they are." Paraphrasing Thomas a' Kempis a bit there.

If Apple banned an app that showed the Nicene Creed or the Apostles' Creed I'd
be more concerned. Those statements sum up with Christianity has meant to
people for a very long period of time. This sort of thing shouldn't probably
have been written let alone had an app produced for.

------
cjoh
This may get the 2010 award for most sensational headline. In no way does the
article make the case that Apple finds Christianity offensive.

Sensational blogging at its finest.

------
storborg
I'm a staunch atheist, but when I read this article, my first reaction was
that apple overstepped their bounds here.

Then I read the text of the Manhattan Declaration. Sure enough, there is
decidedly very anti-gay marriage and anti-choice language in it.

"...the institution of marriage, already buffeted by promiscuity, infidelity
and divorce, is in jeopardy of being redefined to accommodate fashionable
ideologies..."

"...by which the lives of countless children are snuffed out prior to birth."

This is pretty extreme language, and I don't think the app store should be a
political soapbox for it.

~~~
djacobs
So it's not clear to me: what is this app? Is it a text document? Did this
group really go through development efforts to build an app as, basically, an
ad?

If so, I think people are misunderstanding the point of "there's an app for
that".

------
kwantam
Seems reasonable to me. It's pretty clear that inasmuch as the Manhattan
Declaration is openly anti-gay (or, at least, widely perceived as such by the
gay community no matter how much its purveyors would protest otherwise), it's
just as much a violation as openly racist material would be.

------
JabavuAdams
Why are some young talented people so eager to be on the losing side in this
"culture war" (his words)? It's sad to see a guy like this who is ignorant of
his own religion's history.

The Christianity of today is not the Christianity of 1000 years ago.

The Christianity of 100 years from today will not be the Christianity of
today.

Christianity redefined marriage over the last two millennia, so clearly
redefining marriage is Christian.

------
CGamesPlay
I don't think that Apple should have pulled this. Certainly there are pro-gay
apps on the store that some people find just as offensive as the gay community
might find this app. However, Apple doesn't have to feature either of these
apps on the front page or any other page and they can easily be made available
only by looking explicitly for them. Wouldn't those measures debunk the idea
of the app store being a "political soapbox"?

~~~
orenmazor
the government can't have an opinion. corporations? thats a whole different
thing. Apple can do whatever they'd like with their app store. judging by how
much money they're making, I'd bet most people either don't care, or approve.

------
Dylanlacey
At first I was very wary of this. These people believe this, what's wrong with
that?

Then I had a closer look, and I guess it's easily codified for me. Something
is offensive if a group of people want to remove rights from another group,
when the first group have those rights and don't benefit from the second
losing them, except in an abstract, "It devalues us as beings worth of those
rights!" kinda way.

Which, if you look at it, is also saying "We want to be better by having X, if
you let them have X, we won't be better!" OR, in even simpler terms, "They're
not as good as us. Fuck'em."

