Apple CEO Tim Cook joins fight against Indiana anti-gay law

This post has been updated. 

Apple CEO Tim Cook has just tweeted his concerns about a new Indiana law that permits businesses to discriminate against gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people on religious grounds.

His tweets follow statements made by Marc Benioff, the chief executive of Salesforce.com, who is rallying Silicon Valley to fight the law.

After Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signed the bill, known as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Benioff told Recode he cancelled all company events in the state and would do a “slow rolling of economic sanctions.”

Some tech leaders have followed. Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman, in a blog post, warned other states considering similar legislation.

Yelp will make every effort to expand its corporate presence only in states that do not have these laws allowing for discrimination on the books.

Max Levchin, a PayPal co-founder and CEO of Affirm, tweeted:

So far, the other big tech dogs — Google, Facebook and Amazon — have yet to weigh in.

Above: Tim Cook, CEO of Apple (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma, File).

 

 

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Share this Post



 
 
 
  • Spencer Lewis

    CNN shows its bias by putting “Religious Freedom” in scare quotes. What CNN, are you saying that there is no such thing as “Religous Freedom”?

    • ellafino

      The proponents of the law used the term “religious freedom” to get it passed. If they can use it so can the news media.

  • InconvenientTruthsYouHate

    Point of order: It is **NOT** an “anti-gay” law, it is an anti-discrimination-of-any-sort law, and not really “discrimination” so much as “business owner chooses who he serves”, which may be based on discrimination, but could be for reasons totally otherwise… It ALSO means Atheists can use it to discriminate against Christians, black business owners can refuse service to whites, and anyone can use it to discriminate against short people, fat people, or whatever — etc., etc.

    Sure, that SOUNDS bad, but is is really? The law can be used for bad OR GOOD (refusing Chuck-E-Cheese to child molesters), and frankly most businesses would rather have income than drive away potential customers, so the repealing the law will change little if anything of significance.

    Those few businesses who want to use it to stand on some line of morality which is more important to them than money should not have their rights taken from them, or their livelihoods should they refuse to comply with fascist demands. It’s their business they risk if they alienate customers.

    Eliminating the historical option and choice to “refuse service to anyone for any reason” basically takes away personal freedom and the ownership of one’s own business, making us all the PROPERTY of the GOVERNMENT. This push to use “Moral Outrage” stands to drive even more business owners out of business.

    You fascists who put Totalitarian Authoritarianism above liberty thoroughly disgust me. A business who is as hostile to its customer base as you ALLEGE would put itself out of business in short order. You are trying to solve a problem that virtually does NOT exist.

    • ellafino

      And companies have the right to say that it is discrimination in their eyes. This is the same excuse used when sodomy laws were in place, that it wasn’t targeted at gays but everyone. No one bought that BS.

      • InconvenientTruthsYouHate

        So then, if I’m reading you correctly, you are in favor of Chuck E. Cheese being forced to serve child molesters, muslim-owned caterers being forced to serve bar mitsvahs, and “women’s only” gyms being forced to accept male members. Because that’s EXACTLY what your taken position means… The government can force anyone to do anything in the name of alleged discrimination.

        And if you are naive enough to believe that only “good atheist democrats” will be able to use this against “evil christian republicans”, I’ve got a nice bridge you’d probably be interested in purchasing.

  • Rolf Langenfussell

    CEO of Apple against Religious Freedom. How odd? Religious Freedom is the first thing in the First Amendment. His statements are just a proxy for wanting to judge and condemn others who believe differently than he and desire to show it in their lives. So, who is the intolerant bigot. Methinks Mr. Cook needs a look in the mirror. No one is harming him and just how does some cake baker expressing their sincere religious belief harm anyone, in any way? No one like Cook explains that. He just jumps on the TwitterWagon to please his constituency.

    Religious Freedom. First Amendment. Read it. Enlighten yourself Mr. Cook.

  • RegularGuy55

    “Anti-gay law”? That pretty much sums up this ‘journalist’s’ idea of objective reporting.

    Are you now owned by the National Enquirer?

  • Joe J

    Why are liberals so bigoted against Christians and why do they try to force them to do things that go against their religious beliefs or else force them out of business??????????

  • Mark

    good thing there hasn’t been a knee jerk reaction for these hypocrites like Cook.
    He has apple stores in Iran, and they put gays in jail there?

 
 
css.php