Does Apple’s Tim Cook risk blowback over gay rights stand?

It has been extraordinary watching how Apple CEO Tim Cook has emerged as a leader on the issue of gay rights.

From coming out in Bloomberg as a gay man in October, Cook continues to define what his — and his company’s — brand stands for when it comes to gay rights. I am struggling to think of another CEO of a major, consumer-facing company doing anything close.

In the latest instance, Cook’s op-ed in the Washington Post aligns both his point of view with Apple’s business as being against anti-gay measures disguised as religious freedom proposals. Cook said he counted 100 pending bills in states across the country:

Our message, to people around the country and around the world, is this: Apple is open. Open to everyone, regardless of where they come from, what they look like, how they worship or who they love. Regardless of what the law might allow in Indiana or Arkansas, we will never tolerate discrimination.

Apple, of course, has long been a supporter of gay rights, one of the few companies to donate money to stop California’s Prop. 8 in 2008 and one of the earliest to provide benefits to partners of gays and lesbians.

But Steve Jobs, the prior CEO, always appeared reluctant to talk about social issues publicly. Rather, he chose to keep the focus on Apple’s products and services.

Cook is willing to be more public. He hasn’t yet taken the Marc Benioff route, as we wrote about last week, of pulling business from states such as Indiana that pass such laws.

That doesn’t seem like Apple’s approach. But still, Cook is putting the Apple brand in the middle of the debate. And that must come with some risks, such as reduced sales by supporters of such measures.

After all, state political leaders, who are pursuing these bills, are often quite responsive to their electorate, who may support their efforts.

Or perhaps, anything negative to Apple or Cook is offset by what might be gained. Apple and Cook may be able to give more oomph to efforts to stop the measures. But they may bask in a new-founded appreciation of the what the CEO and company will do for certain causes.

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



Tags: , , , , ,


Share this Post

  • John E Strom Jr.

    Tim Cook needs to focus on Apple’s business and not act as spokesman for gay rights. That isn’t his job.

    • USMC 8th and I

      You’re right….and, he has the right to say what he wants…..but, I don’t think it’s especially good for business……

      • Since Apple has gone from near bankruptcy in 1997 to a global powerhouse in 2015, neither of you have a leg to stand on.

  • ISRF

    Of course there will be blowback. There always is in this day and age, no matter what you say or what position you take. But it will be mild, won’t change Apple’s position (thankfully), and Apple would be smart to just ignore it and move ahead.

  • USMC 8th and I

    Apple (Cook) needs to stay out of the political limelight and attend to their innovation and products. The first amendment is something we need to be clear on……. It’s not open to interpretation.

    • KOinSF

      Hm, do you suggest Hobby Lobby, chick filet etc. also stay out of politics?

      • USMC 8th and I

        Do your homework….read the first amendment….then, get back to me……
        How’s things in SF…..

        • KOinSF

          So you do not want to answer because if you do so, honestly, you will have to admit you only care about your view being held by business owners. Got it. Things are beautiful here in SF, thanks.

          • USMC 8th and I

            Honestly….YOU really need to brush up on YOUR constitutional rights……read the first amendment…please…….

          • KOinSF

            Your comment does not even make sense. You suggest Cook stick to business, then tout his 1st amendment rights. Make up your mind.

          • Spencer Lewis

            Also in the first Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

      • Spencer Lewis

        Where has Chic-Fil-A strayed into politics? A lot of people started attacking them because of CEO’s beliefs. A new law (Obamacare) forced Hobby Lobby to violate its religion. They were not the aggressors. Oh, and “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

        • Where has Chic-Fil-A strayed into politics?

          Are you @#$king serious?

          • Spencer Lewis

            Yes. I am sure you can find a link if it is so prevalent where Chic-Fil-A jumped into politics. After they were dragged in by the gay lobby/movement, they got out as soon as they could. Here is wiki case:


            You can see Cathy made comments to a little heard Christian talk show host and Christian magazine about his Christian beliefs (sort of like if Cook did an interview with the Advocate magazine) and the the gay community was SHOCKED! that he held traditional beliefs as a Christian.

            Then it was gay activists who decided to boycott, name-call, etc. Mike Huckabee independently organized Chic-Fil-A day in support. Get down to the sources, man. The spin to sell the narrative is thick and deep.

          • Swordmaker1949

            Chic-Fil-A is a privately held business. They were not publicly advocating anything. They were literally “minding their own business.” The same hold true with Hobby Lobby.

    • Numbers_Wonk

      Do you realize that if I were a business in Indiana and you entered in uniform that I could refuse service to you merely by asserting my belief you are gay? You would literally have no standing to oppose my asserted belief – not based on any fact – just my belief that you were gay.

      That you had served your country in war, been wounded, awarded the Medal of Honor, none of that would trump my asserted belief that you were gay and I would not have to serve you.

      That is the Indiana law.

      • USMC 8th and I

        Hey Pal,
        I’m a big boy and, as far as I’m concerned you have the right to refuse service. I can easily go somewhere else. It’s a big world….and, if you wanted to lose business, that’s your prerogative.
        I’m not the “sensitive” type….
        Plus……….You post a ridiculous situation……

        • You post a ridiculous situation

          That is the situation, and yes it is ridiculous.

        • Numbers_Wonk

          So you’re OK with me saying you’re gay, too, right? ;^) Yeah, I’ll bet you’re not sensitive.

          My hypothetical is not ridiculous is it literally a logical test to demonstrate the fallacy behind the asserting of religious discrimination.

          BTW: You must have also been OK with discriminating against black US soldiers in WWII. German enlisted POWs were given preference over our own black officers.

    • Hey. SFB. The First Amendment applies to government action regarding the stifling of free speech of the citizenry. As a citizen, Tim Cook has every right in the world to tell the religious bigots to shove their bigotry up their a$$.

      It’s not open to interpretation

      The fact that the Constitution has amendments pretty much shuts down that idea.

      • USMC 8th and I

        Looks like this has brought all the gays out in force……
        Go get your cake at a Muslim bakery…..right after they throw you off the roof…….

        • And there we go. Play to type, dullard.

          • USMC 8th and I

            Did you trip over your shoe lace…….mutt!

  • RegularGuy55

    Cook says he won’t “tolerate discrimination”. He carefully does NOT say that he (and Apple) will tolerate dissent.

    Discrimination is wrong, of course. Telling people what they must think is just as wrong.

    • Numbers_Wonk

      Nobody is telling you how to think. Merely that you treat all people equally in public settings.

      If you want to celebrate bigotry with your friends you are free to do so in a private setting. You may hate women, Jews, Muslims, blacks, other ethnic groups, left-handed people, whatever you like in private or even think bad thoughts while treating people with civility in public.

      • Spencer Lewis

        I am not disagreeing with you that it says this, but where in the Constitution does it say treat all people equally in public settings?

  • Spencer Lewis

    Yes. I have used Apple products almost exclusively since 1982, and I thought Jobs had a good balance when it came to politics. I fought for Apple in the dark years at my college where they tried to ban Macs, and in my business place. I don’t like Cook’s implications that I am a hater if I support HB1228 (I live in Arkansas) and if Apple is going to use its market position as a bully pulpit, I will personally take my business and support elsewhere (as much as it will pain me). Cook (as well as much of the Silicon Valley press) are taking marching orders from the HRC, which has completely mischaracterized the nature of the bills. When the gay lobby ran the Mozilla CEO out of town for giving a piddly $1k to prop 8, I sort of knew this day of individuals using the corporations they control to shove their values on everyone via economics would come. (By the way, I’d like to see Marc B move his Salesforce company out of Arkansas, the Silicon Valley of retail). If Tim Cook ever goes down that line, we’ll see. But why would he sell to us here in Arkansas, since we are “bigoted” … why would he be good with our “homophobic” money filling his pocket? Or the other 20 states that have similar laws to HB1228?

    • RegularGuy55

      Very true. What we are seeing is more along the lines of token gestures than substance. Let’s see them move their operations out of the states which have laws they object to. Let’s see them ban sales of their products to customers in states which have laws they object to.

      That way, they REALLY have some skin in the game. All we’re getting now is a group of poseurs posturing in front of the camera.

      • Dbom


        I wonder what the guy said when someone told him there are 30 other states that have similar laws or protections?

        I doubt he’s going to tell his employees to ignore 60% of the USA over these laws:
        A) cause he’s a DB and B) he doesn’t want to lose THAT much business…

    • KOinSF

      I am sure Apple will be just fine if those who support pro-discrimination laws stop buying their products. Have fun using Microsoft Windows 8. LOL

      • Spencer Lewis

        I would not stop using Apple products to hurt Apple. They will be just fine without me, I am sure. But I will sleep better at night knowing I didn’t empower them to truncate religious freedom under the banner of “Human Rights.”

        • Numbers_Wonk

          Complete nonsense and malarkey. Your religious “freedom” is not truncated.

          In your public dealings you get to treat people equally. That’s pretty easy, isn’t it? You can even mentally swear or insult a customers you don’t like while serving anyone who walks into your public accommodation (aka business).

          You can continue to wear white hoods and burn crosses, or dress up in camouflage, shoot .50 caliber sniper guns and burn rainbow flags to your heart’s content in private. Is this a free country, or what?

          • Spencer Lewis

            Your disrespect is plain, and your words smell of bigotry toward religious people. I have no desire to denigrate or disrespect those who don’t agree with me; in fact, I hope all people generally find happiness in their life.

            But on the issue that Mr. Cook (and the Human Rights Campaign) seek to punctuate, they demand that I participate is something that is deeply against my beliefs. I believe that the foundation of human existence is a one-woman, one-man marriage-bound family, and anything that deviates from that order leads to the disintegration of society – I believe this in significant part because of my faith and Christian Scripture

            However, just like many gays define their identity through their sexuality, I define my identity through my faith, in this case Christianity. So if I am coerced to participate in what my faith (and most people throughout history) consider a sacred act, a wedding, the beginning point of a marriage, then I am forced to go against the my very self. This is not an arbitrary point to exercise some sort of bigotry, this is based on thousands of years of history and advanced theology. You may think its crazy, but many of America’s immigrants came to our land because of religious freedom (not mine, they are from Mexico). This is one of the reasons why there is Freedom of Religion, or more specifically: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” I am sure you are familiar with the text.

    • Swordmaker1949

      Where are you going to go? Microsoft has had this same policy as Apple just adopted for ten years, and was a co-signer with Apple of the petition condemning the Indiana law. It is just business as usual with the mainstream press to use Apple in the headlines and feature Tim Cook. . . it gets more hits and clicks for advertisers. Google (Android) is a co-signer. The NBA and NASCAR just signed on today opposing it. The Governor of Connecticut slammed Governor Pence for signing such discriminatory a law ignoring that Connecticut itself has an even more restrictive Freedom of Religion law than Indiana’s new law! This is all ginned up by the Liberal news media. . . and it makes me wonder what we are not supposed to notice happening elsewhere while we are watching this ridiculous nothing of a sideshow!


      • Spencer Lewis

        You make a good point.

  • RegularGuy55

    Apple is sitting on BILLIONS of dollars in foreign banks. Why doesn’t Cook volunteer to use some of that cash horde to fund a lawsuit (maybe multiple lawsuits) to overturn the law(s) he disagrees with.

    We have a long-established process in America for challenging laws. Cook and the rest of his sympathizers want to short circuit that process and use their bully pulpit to force change.

    • Numbers_Wonk

      The Apple Board of Directors would have to make the decision. Apple already withdrew from ALEC, one of the groups that supports laws like this.

  • jeungjeung feoung

    This is a non issue and is not a story. Tim Cook understands the power of his position and is using it to express his personal view on issues he believes in. He should be commended for that and Apple will not suffer as a result. Frankly, if his stand on gay rights issues compels an individual to avoid his company’s products, then that is one less bigot in the world using Apple gear. One less person who uses Apple gear to distribute hate, bigotry and discontent.

    • Dbom

      Do you wonder what he thinks about GLBT rights in China?

      I’m sure it’s all good or Tim would have used his position of power and influence to demonize the Chinese Gov, right?

      Or maybe the checks he gets from them are too big…and he keeps his trap shut on that…

      • Maybe you should try to grasp the %$#king implications here. What good is it to criticise a foreign government for it’s treatment of the LGTB when you own country is trying to enact laws to make religious delusions a protected stance?

        • Spencer Lewis

          See, and here it is, isn’t it. You are really anti-religious, a bigot against people of faith. The LGTB stuff is just your way at hurting an enemy tribe, isn’t it?

          • The delusions of the self righteous do not deserve special protection. The “deeply held” beliefs of hypocrites and liars that fashion a god that hates what they hate are not a basis for a civil society. You don’t get to demand tolerance for your intolerance. You’ve played your hand and it exposes your shallow and base motivations. Too late to cry about “freedom” when you’ve actively indicated you are demanding the right to treat others as second class citizens.

          • Steve

            As Spencer said, Shadow you are simply anti-religious, probably ill educated (in terms of religious history and beliefs) and using your bias to reinforce your position that it is ok to force people to serve those with whom they choose to not serve. If i’ve got to buy your liberal girlfriends birth control, feed your out of wedlock unmarried baby momma’s 6 children, and pay for your illegal alien’s healthcare, the least you can do is allow my baker to plainly state without fearing his own government, that he does not deliver cakes to what he considers perverts acting out their artificial ‘marriage’ ceremony.

          • You are not being “forced” to do anything. If you set up a shop to provide goods and services in exchange for currency, that is what you do. It wasn’t defensible when whites refused to serve blacks and Mexicans and Jews for the simple fact that they were blacks and Mexicans and Jews. It will not be defensible to refuse service to gays because they are gay. Your religious delusions weren’t good enough to deny blacks and Jews and Mexicans service, they are not good enough to deny gays service. If it troubles you to sell goods and services you promised to sell, get out of business.

            probably ill educated (in terms of religious history and beliefs)

            You’d be wrong, as are all theists about the education level of their critics, because too many of you arrogant thugs imagine your superstitions to be impenetrable. This is bigotry cloaked in religion and wrapped in the flag. It’s transparent and obscene.

            If i’ve got to buy your liberal girlfriends birth control, feed your out of wedlock unmarried baby momma’s 6 children, and pay for your illegal alien’s healthcare,

            Empty racist and bigoted talking points don’t help make your case. They in fact drive home to shallow nature of the bigots that hide their ignorance and bigotry behind religion as if you’ve ever made your case that your peculiar delusions are actually worthy of respect.

          • Steve

            To have to violate the written religious doctrine of the worlds Jews, Christians and Muslims, to have to kowtow to perversion and the bastardization of the very institution designed to protect children to have to show up and take photos or arrange flowers at such disgusting perversion of the historical definition of marriage in most parts of the world – OR close up shop or be sued by the government is the definition of FORCE. People can not change their race, but people can restrain their perverted ways, or at least accept that society does not want to hand it’s children over to them for instruction.

          • To have to violate the written religious doctrine of the worlds Jews, Christians and Muslims,

            You don’t give a flying @#$k about the “written religious doctrine” of any religion. If you did, you’d be running Red Lobster out of the cities, destroying polycotton blend t-shirts, stoning adulterers, refusing to push buttons on the Sabbath, never cutting your beard and killing atheists. The number of religious tenets you ignore and outright violate is overwhelming compared to the specific claims you make regarding gays. The number of irrational, utterly nonsensical claims you make regarding your “religious doctrine” that are complete fabrications is embarrassing.

            the bastardization of the very institution designed to protect children

            The child rapists in the Roman Catholic Church relish your support. The mohels giving babies herpes thank you for your understanding. The millions dead in Africa from avoidable plagues are grateful for being saved from the sin of condoms.

            disgusting perversion of the historical definition of marriage

            The historical definition you fabricated in the last few centuries at best? The historical marriage that had you paying the grooms family to sell off your daughters? The historical marriage that forced you to accept the murder of women that were not virgins? When it comes to disgusting perversions, nothing can eclipse the disgusting perversions of the Abrahamic religions and the texts upon which they are based.

            Never mind the fact that the Bible has little to nothing to say about what constitutes a marriage. Marriage is a societal construct. Claiming the institution of marriage as a strictly or even mostly religious invention in any sense is a lie. Pretending that marriage owes it’s existence to religions founded thousands of years after the earliest known civilisations is just another manifestation of the arrogant conceit of theists in general and Christians in particular that think their Bronze Age superstitions are the basis for Western society. You don’t own marriage, you don’t get to define marriage, and your superstitions are not a basis for the denial of services to partners in a union that has absolutely nothing to do with you and requires your blessing in no way, shape or form!

            people can restrain their perverted ways

            But obviously not Christians. They have to have their religious perversions poison the law of the law to gain the imprimatur of legitimacy on their superstitious fabrications. No one can be allowed to live their life without Christians passing judgement on them. The evangelical Christian perverts will always demand that someone be considered base an undeserving so they can placate the gods they created with their strident claims to virtue and holiness.

            society does not want to hand it’s children over to them for instruction.

            I agree that Sunday school is an abhorrent practice, given the strident Christians need to inculcate their children with pure, unadulterated horse manure regarding the natural world.

          • Steve

            You’re off track Shadow. The bible says as follows:

            Marriage between a man and a woman Genesis 2:24 states: “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh.”

            In Matthew 19:4-5, Jesus reaffirms this: “He answered, ‘Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’?”

            As to the sins of others, that is correct, and if you even consider the Catholic doctrine anything like that of Christ I think one has to have blinders on. I only support the right to choose to not violate marriage in the biblical and therefore American context. You on the other hand want to shove your beliefs down the throats of everyone else. Go talk to the founding fathers about religious persecution, and governmental overreach.

          • Yes, in a book that also claims shellfish and polycotton blend clothing are stoning offences and grasshoppers have 4 legs.

            I only support the right to choose to not violate marriage

            Gibberish. The Christians violate the tenets they claim to uphold every time they get divorced, remarry and cheat on their spouses. They no more hold marriage sacred than the hold the Sabbath to be holy.

            Everyone every single one of you that claims that they abide by the sacrosanct practices and tenets of the Christian Bible is a hypocrite and a liar.

          • Steve

            Nothing racist in there at all, you are clearly a denier of the statistical evidence, as sorted by race and political orientation. Take a walk through the south side of Chicago hypocrite and you will see the real world as created by liberals, trying to help people by making them dependent on others.
            Denial, and the race bating tactic only shows how ignorant and low you liberals will go to push your beliefs on others.

        • Spencer Lewis

          I don’t know. Maybe Apple shouldn’t be selling in places like Dubai, and Mr. Cook should speak out against them. Instead, he opens the largest Apple store ….

          Where gay relations, forget gay marriage, is a serious crime…

          • Again. Tim Cook is not a citizen of the UAE, He is a citizen of the United States. This sad fascination with the Nirvana fallacy is just an attempt to dodge the point. Tim Cook’s statements are directed at the people in his own country that would turn the USA into a theocracy.

            It’s absolutely a given that if Cook did make the same statement about the UAE, you would find the reverse angle to again criticise his statements, almost certainly berating him for not looking in his own back yard.

    • Spencer Lewis

      No, this is bullying. Someone with real power (Cook) is using his power to push people to accept his viewpoint or else… . Now I know that Cook doesn’t see it that way, but I am sad to see the left demagoguery that tries to SHAME people who want to be able to live freely and not participate in actions their faith doesn’t condone. These laws are not about restricting the freedom of gays; it’s about forcing people to not be true to their core identity. And until you get the first amendment thrown out, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

      • You are an idiot and a liar if you believe equality under the law for everyone is “bullying”.

        • Spencer Lewis

          You are close minded and bigoted, and do not understand the Bill of Rights if you don’t believe people have a right to practice religion in this country. See, I can insult too. Doesn’t really help, does it. I don’t think a gay photographer should have to take pictures at an anti-gay rally, do you? I don’t think a black photographer should have to take photos at a KKK rally.

          • you don’t believe people have a right to practice religion

            You can practice all you want. You just don’t get to practice it on others. Bible humpers have not learned a single thing from the civil rights movements of the 60s except how to cloak their intolerance in the flag and the Bible.

          • Spencer Lewis

            Yea. You are just stereotyping, know nothing of my heart, and clearly don’t believe the First Amendment has any meaning, so we really have nothing to do but talk past each other. I wish you happiness and long life. Peace to you.

        • Guest

          “Equality” is about respecting religious beliefs of others, and they respecting yours, not about left wing requirement that all people believe the same thing and behave in the same manner.

      • Steve

        Well said, Spencer.

  • Dizzy11523

    Tim is a gay bully.

    • Numbers_Wonk

      Nonsense and malarkey.

    • Steve

      An intolerant (of other’s beliefs – as reflected historically and currently around the world) bully. To claim that homosexuality is anything other than significant perversion of normal human behavior is simply a joke. The 3% can not be allowed to dictate to the 97%.

  • Numbers_Wonk

    How can support for equality of all people not be good for all people? Any business that uses that as one of their guiding principles will be stronger, not weaker.

  • Bill Lennan

    Tim is speaking his position.
    He’s taking a risk – knowing full well that it won’t be universally popular.

    A lot of people are afraid to speak their mind unless they can point to someone else who has much more at risk and speaks out about a scary topic.

    These are such superficial reasons to discriminate. Hell, why don’t you not let me into your place of business because I’m less than 6′ tall or because I have kids or design software or, or…

    I’m 100% sure that my $$ spend just as well as anyone else.
    (It’s interesting that other businesses who throw very large dollar amounts at getting their political agendas aren’t mentioned by commenters)

    At some level, I have to ask – what are you really afraid of??
    People discriminate out of fear – plain an simple (and of course they are terrified to actual admit that fear).
    So – as you are thinking about where/how/why you should discriminate – maybe a better is “why does this idea scare the daylights out of me”.

    • Dbom

      Yes, huge risk to face the glowing applause from his 1%er friends in Corp and .gov.

      Hahaha- what risk?

      What a crock…

      • Bill Lennan

        The risk is all the people who are not fans of his perspective.
        Sounds like you are one of them.

    • Spencer Lewis

      I respect that Mr. Cook is taking a risk. I still think his arguments have no merits until we see these laws defend actual significant harm to a gay person. Mr. Cook obviously doesn’t support the legitimate exercise of religion, which the Constitution clearly supports in the First Amendment.

      • Numbers_Wonk

        Nonsense. Mr. Cook is in favor of treating everyone equally. What is wrong with that and how does that impinge on a “legitimate exercise of religion?”

  • aktrader2

    Each person has the right and an obligation to point out when and where they think something is not right. The legislation seems to have stemmed from events in Colorado, Oregon, Nevada and Washington state. As any legislation, one can not be specific to cover one subject, but is often too broad/vague for the intent.
    It has yet to be tested, but do not believe this legislation can be used in hiring practices which seems where most people have taken the interpretation of the legislation. I do not believe it can be used to deny people access.
    To draw analogies is dangerous, so each will have to come up with their own scenarios. Pick a category and place the contrary in that environment requiring services. Could a customer compel a business owner to furnish services? i.e. could a caterer be compelled to include ingredients for an event that is contrary to them. I’ll try a safe analogy, could a business specializing in vegetarian or vegan foods, be compelled to cater an event that would include meats/eggs, etc. Taking the broad stroke that food is food, …….

  • pdq3

    I think someone like Tim Cook, when he sees out-and-out discrimination, is going to speak up without consideration or fear of “blowback”.

    Which, frankly, he should. It’s certainly raised my opinion of him.

    • Dbom

      So do you like his stance on human rights in China?

      Yeah, me neither. Cause he could give a flying F.

      Show me the cash baby…

  • Codger37

    It is instructive to see which States adopt such, statutes and while they’re clearly a form of discrimination, they’re ultimately short sighted and harmful to both the people of the States and ignorant, in light of Christian teachings.

    Of course Mr. Cook has a stake in such policy matters and given his leadership of a very progressive firm I think his action is consistent with ‘thinking differently’ a bedrock value for Apple.

    I hope that the citizens of Indiana wake up to become inclusive as that was both a Christain value and good business.

    Many religious instituions have forgotten the teachings of Jesus. Sad as the alternatives get people hurt or worse.

  • zorro1945

    Curious, the tolerance that groups claim for themselves they do not want codified into law. Reverse bigotry, perhaps.

  • Dbom

    Hey, I wonder if China has any laws Tim Cook might be against?

    Prob not- they get him $16 Billion so he’s gonna keep his freakin trap shut on that one.

    What a hypocrite…and complete DB.

    • So your response to concerns that the US might be turning into China is to… wait.

      • Dbom

        Is that what you got from that comment?

        Hmmmm. I need to write more clearly next time.

        How about this: when it comes to human rights abuses, no one takes a back seat to China’s communist government. Murder, work camps, slave labor, harvesting organs etc.

        Tim Cook? when he gets a chance to use his position of power, he pipes up against who? Not the $16BILLION sugar daddy. Nope.

        He stands up against Indiana! The 31st US state to enact protections of conscience against the dang government. No murder. No work camps. No harvesting of organs. No prison time for being GLBTQWERTY.

        He’s a complete DB.

        Is that clear enough for ya????

        • Numbers_Wonk

          Do you think it’s possible to work for one goal in 2 places at the same time? The goal is equal treatment.

          How about we influence other Americans and also influence China?
          See that was easy.

          • Dbom

            A) let me know when the DB Tim Cook takes to twitter and boycotts China for this “two pronged” approach. (my guess is that won’t EVER happen…)

            B) China doesn’t protect Chinese citizen’s conscience rights like we do here in the USA. See the .gov shouldn’t force people to act against their beliefs unless there is a compelling reason. In China they just arrest you for disagreeing. Here, we have a higher burden for state action. That’s a damn good thing.

            C) Equality? Hmmmm. I wonder if you think forcing a black owned catering company to work a NeoNazi convention is Equal to forcing a Christian photographer to take pictures at a gay wedding? Would the state have the power to force them both?

            My vote is to let people choose. You vote is to have the state power and authority force people to do what YOU and Tim Cook want.

            Scratch a progressive and u get an Authoritarian. They love forcing people to do sh*t…

        • So the same, sad overused attack on Apple again and again…

          Apple can’t speak out on some problem because they didn’t solve all problems.

          It isn’t even irony to point out that when it comes to the people in China, that you actually don’t give a flying @#$k about, Apple has been more focused on results and done more to advance their cause than any other technology manufacturer that you same lot also don’t seem to give a s@#t about.

          None of you crackheads give two s@#ts about anyone in China for any reason. The only reason you even know anything about Apple’s supply chain is because hacks and charlatans have inculcated you with the idea that Apple is the only one with this problem, and not the entire world’s economic systems and supply chains. Almost nothing of a technical nature within your arms reach at this very second was not made in China or somewhere overseas under worse conditions than those in Apple’s subcontractors facilities. So spare us your faux concern that you only trot out when Apple is the subject of conversation. It’s pathetic and transparent.

          • Dbom

            Great point “Shadow of Your Former self”!

            Let’s let a 1%er focus our attention on the evil tea party theocrats and you can run cover and tell us that we all don’t really give a crap and besides, our lives would be way worse off if we didn’t rely on Chinese made junk.


            You can see the actual point of this conversation.

            Tim Cook could have tweeted his “disappointment” about a million things.

            Go check out his timeline.

            Not once has he EVER called out China or Saudi Arabia or North Korea or any other oppressive government on REAL HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES.


            But he HAS called out the state government of Indiana, USA. Yay!!! Heroism in Action!

            “We are deeply disappointed in Indiana’s new law…”
            “There’s something very dangerous happening in states across the country…”

            Why this? Why now? Who has been killed or falsely imprisoned? Which political prisoner has been sent to the work camps on trumped up charges? Which government policy forces abortion on families of more than one child? Which woman has gotten 70 lashes for insulting a man on whatsapp?

            But king DB and his 1%er buddies don’t use their power and influence to change these backward places…nope.

            They take on the people and .gov of a small midwestern state for the crime of protecting it’s citizens from being forced to act against their conscience. That used to be considered a good thing in the Land of the Free…

            And you want to talk about Apple’s supply chain? Man did you miss the point…by a mile…

          • Tim Cook is a citizen of the United States. He is not in a position to Tweet anything regarding human rights in any other country in the world while his own nation is trying to pass discriminatory legislation. Tim Cook does not speak for the United States. As the head of a multinational corporation he risks US interests if he openly attacks the leaders of a country that the US does trillions of dollars of business with. Which is exactly what you would be carping about if Cook DID attack China’s human rights recr=ord.

            Which leads to the usual rebuttal when you clowns get your panties in a twist regarding Apple: you don’t actually give a flying @#$k about the Chinese or anyone else. You only ramble about China when you imagine it will score points against Apple. That’s it, that’s all.

          • RegularGuy55

            Did you mention the billions of dollars in profits Apple parks overseas to avoid US taxation?

            No? Well, you should.

          • Like every single US multinational.

            What else you got?

          • RegularGuy55

            “Every single US multinational” CEO isn’t pontificating about American civil rights the way Cook is. You build your products in Indo-Chinese sweatshops, then park the profits overseas to avoid US taxes, but rankle at the State of Indiana because a law offends your sensibilities.

            That’s hypocrisy. That’s all I need.

      • RegularGuy55

        Cook’s commitment to the US is also . . . questionable. Apple parks BILLIONS of dollars in profits overseas to avoid paying US taxes.

        So suddenly this tax-avoiding, sweatshop-labor-using company decides that the State of Indiana is morally repugnant for protecting the rights and freedoms of its residents?

        • Every company on the planet parks the money it makes overseas overseas. There are no laws forcing said companies to bring the cash back to their home base or country of origin. And as far as taxes go, Apple pays more taxes than a great many companies that could be named.

          Your point regarding Apple’s cash is irrelevant to this discussion.

          • RegularGuy55

            I don’t care if they do. Or if they don’t. The subject here is APPLE. Cook is posturing as the protector of American rights, indignant that Indiana (along with 39 other states) has a law he doesn’t like.

            As long as he’s representing as the All-American company, let’s see them NOT use the foreign profits tax loophole. Bring those profits home, let them be taxed, donate money to his favorite LGBT charity, THEN let him pose for the cameras as an American hero.

          • indignant that Indiana (along with 39 other states)

            Indiana’s legislation is particularly pernicious. If you haven’t bothered to educate yourself as to why, don’t bother to lecture us regarding said law.

            let’s see them NOT use the foreign profits tax loophole.

            And then what? Again, you are talking about international laws regarding multinational corporations. it’s irrelevant to Cook’s criticism of Indiana’s problematic law.

            THEN let him pose for the cameras as an American hero.

            Tim Cook is already a hero for coming out as the head of a global multinational powerhouse and now for standing firm against the tide of legislated intolerance the delusional want to force on the unwilling. We are witnessing the death throes of superstitionists terrified about losing their imagined grip on society. The religious loons have commandeered the conversation long enough. Time for you to accept that your Bronze Age superstitions are not deserving of respect, much less protection from progress.

          • RegularGuy55

            Why is it that all gay right’s loons insist on a ‘zero sum’ situation? Why do all of them insist they can’t have ‘rights’ unless they take them away from others?

            The absolute, scorched-Earth lack of tolerance by gay rights’ never ceases to amaze.

          • Why is it that all gay right’s loons insist on a ‘zero sum’ situation?

            They are not the ones insisting it’s zero sum. That’s what bigots think because they honestly believe that for everyone to be equal before the law, someone is losing the “right” to consider people unequal before the law.

            Why do all of them insist they can’t have ‘rights’ unless they take them away from others?

            You do not have a right to discriminate.

            The absolute, scorched-Earth lack of tolerance by gay rights’ never ceases to amaze.

            Give it a rest. The only thing getting “scorched” are bigots and racists. You have no inalienable right to discriminate against anyone, especially on the basis of fabricated religious nonsense that you never apply in a consistent fashion.

          • RegularGuy55

            That wasn’t an answer. It was just a zealot spinning words.

          • Nice try. But I admire your admission that you really don’t want an answer to your question that doesn’t confirm the unsupported assertions contained in your question.

          • RegularGuy55

            Did it again! You’ve practiced this, haven’t you?

          • No one is buying your dimbulb act where you pretend you don’t understand words.

          • RegularGuy55

            No matter WHAT I write, you will do what liberals always do. You will spin it, turn it around, and turn it into an accusation. ALL to deflect the fact that you don’t have any REAL, SUBSTANTIVE answers.

          • That’s more lovely projection on your part, but the fact of the matter is that you ask questions predicated on unwarranted and unevidenced assumptions and conclusions that you then refuse to clarify or address. You only ask questions to which you already know what answer you want to hear. The fault lies with you. No one else.

          • RegularGuy55

            Talking to you is like trying to nail Jell-O to the wall.

          • More projection. Do you have any original thoughts?

  • menlodesign

    Apple Board members should be asking themselves if the CEO’s personal agendas are getting in the way of the company’s success.

    • Since they just had the largest quarter of any company in history, the answer is already decided.

      • Spencer Lewis

        I concede that the likelihood of Apple suffering any measurable financial fallout from this is low to none.

        • Numbers_Wonk

          I assert this will boost their share price.

    • dbtech85

      I agree with Menlodesign…..

      As an investor in Apple, I can say that Mr. Cook’s first responsibility is to the Apple shareholders and employees. As the chief of Apple he is afforded a platform to speak for
      the company in ways that benefit shareholders and employees. While he can hold any view he wishes personally, when he takes the platform that his position affords him and begins to use it to put forth personal agendas, then he is abusing that platform. He needs to decide whether his first priority is going to be that of Apple chief or gay
      rights activist and act accordingly. Or risk having the platform pulled out from under him.

      • Give it a rest.

      • Numbers_Wonk

        You are free to sell your Apple shares. Isn’t capitalism a great system?

        • Steve

          …and shareholders are free to remove Cook from his position should he continue to abuse it.

      • bob roll

        sell your shares.. don’t buy Apple products if you feel that way…

    • Albert Hartman

      Apple’s commitment to doing what’s right versus just chasing ROI is known. Look how they answered a climate-denier investor’s concern about their clean energy investments.

      “When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind, I don’t consider the bloody ROI. If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock.”

      If you buy Apple stock, you should know the philosophy of the company you are getting. Apple serves many constituents. The last and least important on that list is Wall Street investors.

      • Spencer Lewis

        Wall Street investors, 401k holders, like me, etc., OWN Apple. But I am sure they the shareholders and board members won’t care if Apple calls out “bigots” as long as Apple still lines its pockets with “homophobic” money.

      • RegularGuy55

        This is the SAME Apple which has its products made in Indochina sweat shops? The SAME Apple which parks BILLIONS in profits in offshore banks to avoid US taxes?

        THAT is the Apple you’re claiming is taking the moral high ground?

        The public position of Apple is eyewash. The company is all about their ROI.

  • Does Apple’s Tim Cook risk blowback over gay rights stand?”

    Yes. From the same crowd that refused the dismantling of segregation, the teaching of evolution and the control of polluters.

    So, the “blowback”, if any, will be from people proud of their ignorance and strident in their superstitions. All the better to identify the attitudes and beliefs that society can do without.

    • Steve

      I’m not ignorant of or deny that blacks score lowest of all races in testing, are 12 percent of the population, commit 30% of the crimes. You might read the massive statistical analysis presented in The Bell Curve studies, or you can continue your own denial of the facts, in the name of leftist self righteous intolerance.

      • bob roll

        @Steve .. and so what? you to any other country where a group of people is poor and shut out and you can use the same logic… there are black doctors, lawyers, judges, police officers, teachers etc… there are dumb stupid ignorant blacks, whites, brown and yellows… so what?.. don’t use stats to justify hate…

        • Steve

          I don’t hate blacks at all, the only thing i hate is denial of the facts in the name of political correctness.

          • bob roll

            what facts? do you want me to give you facts on serial killers? (white men).. largest genocidal killers in the history of humanity (white men).. the destroyers of our society the most vile destructive killers in the history of the world (white men).. peodophiles, child molesterols, heroine users, etc.. white people.. stop it with the racist crap.. there is enough to go around.. stop trying to paint crime as black.. there is enough to go around….

    • ldbrandel

      Blowback may come in the form of people who didn’t side with the people who came out against the Citizen’s United case, but now may think that they would want to limit the power of CEOs to what extent they can. So now you get some lefties and some righties getting together. Thus the blowback may be against POWER itself and not the topic the power is backing.

  • tom

    It is not a gay stand….Everyone who is against this law chooses who they want to work for but they want to deny the right of someone else to choose who they work for. THAT IS STUPID

  • Mr. Right

    It makes sense that the head of apple is a fruit.

  • Steve

    Timmy Cook can take it or give it in the behind all day and night, that’s his right, but it’s my right to refuse to certify his phony marriage, take pictures of him locking lips with his male lover, or bake and serve a cake at his or his friends wedding. Homosexuals are often wonderful people, but their intolerance to the beliefs of others shows just how abusive they have become. Homosexual’s are less than 3% of the population, and have NO RIGHT to dictate that I serve a cake at their wedding if I find their lifestyle what it is, a sad and perverted twist of human behavior. I am seriously considering never buying another Apple product, now that the work of Steve Jobs has become a POLITICAL/SOCIAL tool for the gay left. Jobs had the class and good sense to not use his business success, as a public forum to preach leftist intolerance.

    • bob roll

      if homosexuality is a sin let God sort that out…. treat people as people… if you don’t like what they do then don’t associate with them.. if you don’t like Cook and his gay propaganda then show it by not buying Apple products…. gay people are not dictating anything.. they don’t want to lose a job, get beat up or worse because they are gay… (or black, brown, a woman, etc.)…

      • Steve

        I treat all gays with love, just as i do alcoholics, and other people in need of acceptance, but I do not plan to serve coffee at a fake ‘marriage’ for gays any more that I would for a polygamist with 15 kids and 5 wives. Some behaviors are better for society, some are negatives, and turning children over to two male lovers is not, as it has been shown, a good idea.

        • Steve

          God will sort it out if there is a god, but marriage is an institution for the protection and raising of children on earth today, and children have no place in the gay lifestyle. Who the hex to they think they are to attempt to forcefully redefine and undermine the very institution that for is designed for the protection of children, not the celebration of their 3% perverted strain of love.

          • bob roll

            @steve.. marriage does not protect children… that’s a myth… otherwise there would not be so many children that are the victim of child abuse, neglect etc. in heterosexual Christian households…. white picket fence husband and wife suburbs, etc.. that’s a myth that has long been exposed as hypocrisy… love is oderless, tasteless, raceless, faceless, genderless…. 2 men loving each other or 2 women loving each other and having a family that is also loving is better than some heterosexual couple putting on a good act and the wife is getting abused and/or the children are getting abuse behind closed doors.. but it looks good on the outside their 2.5 kids, dog and stable marriage etc… don’t believe the hype…

        • bob roll

          no one should have special rights.. but all should have equal rights… hate is bad in any form… other countries around the world don’t seem to have the kind of problem with sexual orientation that we do… in the end it’s up to God.. not man to “punish” people for being “gay”… until then treat people correctly…

        • Anonymous one

          First of all, there’s a lot of gay people who are not even sexually active, like myself. We are not “sexual deviants.” Second of all, I hate apple.

          • Joel

            Yes, you hate yourself as well as is evidenced by your posts. Every single post where someone tries to defend or say something positive about Apple, you respond to with utter retarded bullshit, your opinion being masqueraded as fact. Low intelligence, Vitriol filled troll LOSER. Go change the Fry grease you sad strange little man, I hear your McManager calling.

      • NC77

        If gays don’t like bakers who won’t bake a cake for their homosexual wedding then don’t do business with them. Find another baker who will.

        • bob roll

          they did… at the same time the it is illegal to discrimminate against people if you have a public business… privately I can do whatever I want…

    • anon

      that arguement is getting really old and makes no sense, what you care that much that two people who love each other want to get married….really where is the problem…if you care about what people do in their privacy of their bedroom that’s just perversion not religion

      • Steve

        I don’t give too hoots about them, I care about the children, boys an girls what will have to grow up in a ‘family’ of homosexuals and other sexual deviants. I also care about the historical reason for marriage, other than property rights (Civil Unions can handle that) and that is whatever is in the BEST INTERESTS OF INNOCENT CHILDREN. Your gay blades have a long way to go to demonstrate that they can raise non-gay, sexually normal, emotionally well adjusted children.

        • anon

          just stay under your uneducated ignorant rock and we’ll be better off…

      • NC77

        But you care about whether or not someone bakes a cake for a homosexual wedding? Why is that so important to you? Find another baker who will do it. Duh.

  • ellafino

    I think the people who have a problem with his stand barely know how to use a computer let alone an iPhone so I don’t think he has much to worry about.

    • bob roll

      I totally agree… IQ and open mindedness should not rise or fall equally but they do seem to ….

      • Steve

        I built a business using Apples from Apple 2+ days, made a few million and retired at age 45. I also made a fortune in Apple stock back when it was lead by a classy individual, and not a shill for LBGT movement. Your self centered, statistically irrelevant ‘conclusion’ about who does not appreciate the current and hopefully leaving soon head of Apple being a mouthpiece for having gay men raise a generation of children shows your own ignorance.

        • bob roll

          your obvious hatred of “gay” people not withstanding… being inclusive is good business… hate isn’t

          • robert chacon

            Heres the crux of the matter. You and people like you are so biased that if anyone merely says they do not support LGBT politics you simply fling ad hominem attacks of bigotry , hatred, homophobia. Its so easy to simply hurl such rhetoric without even turning on ones brain to actually respond to an argument. Its NOT hate to oppose gay “marriage” or to support religious rights that allow people to not be FORCED by the state to provide services for causes they object to. If that is simply hate, then you are simply a religion/Christian hater , bigot , and religionphobe! Simple minded bigotry can just as easily be slung back at those hurling it mindlessly toward Christians and other religious and NON religious, and even many homosexual people, who dont hate anyone, but simply believe that laws that proscribe traditional marriage ensure that a child is provided his or her basic human right to a mother and a father. If people insist this is hate, then I insist they hate children!

          • bob roll

            I don’t care one bit if you do not support LGBT. That is your right. But I will point out hate. I do no support making laws against people because you hate them. Let people live and do what they want. If they harm you are your family then you can do what you want to them. I don’t care what their race, status or sexual orientation. If a company does not want to do business with LGBT then find a way to get that done without making up laws to do what you don’t have the balls to say outloud. Put a sign up in the window “Christian Family Business” or something else that gets the point across. Blacks, hispanics, etc.. they know where they aren’t wanted. They know the stores to stay away from etc… It is what it is. But don’t hide behind your rhetoric and act like it isn’t really all about hate.

  • I believe that Cook was in any position to speak for Apple at the time and a nobody, just like you and I.

  • UpChuck.Liberals

    A private business has the right to refuse service. Just as APPLE has refused to allow certain Apps that don’t meet their standards on the App Store. So, it’s a bit like the kettle calling the pot black. Beside the newly minted law is NO DIFFERENT from the Federal Law or from the laws in some 26 other states. It’s a lovely thing about a free country, you can go somewhere else for services.

  • anon

    religion is the most intolerant hypocritical thing in the world…

    • Steve

      You clearly don’t know Christ or his teachings, but instead you blame flawed humans for your own ignorance of the truth about Christianity.

      • sting_is_ok

        Christianity is wrong – regardless of what you think of religion in general –
        based on the so-called “Old Testament.”

        Here are some of the reasons (there are many more):

        The Messiah’s primary job is to usher in the messianic age (which he clearly didn’t do). There was no notion of a “second coming” (especially with a 2000 or more year gap since the first), prior to the death of Jesus. Therefore, it was invented to explain the situation, which comparable to changing the rules after the game has begun.

        * The messiah must be a patrilineal descendant of Kings David and Solomon. Since according to the New Testament, he was born of a virgin, he is not a patrilineal descendent of these kings (or anybody else).

        * The word that is translated as virgin is alma, which really means a young woman
        without reference to her sexual history. Also, it actually says ha-alma
        (the young woman; ha being the definite article). Thus, the reference to ha-alma indicates somebody personally known to King Ahaz and Isaiah, approximately 700 years before the time of Jesus. The Hebrew word for virgin is betula, which is not used in the relevant chapter. The baby in question is the King Hezekiah who was born approximately 739 BCE.

        * There is no prior notion of a divine messiah, invalidating most mainline Christian theologies.

    • Tim Arnold

      Sorry, ignorant people like yourself are the most hypocritical thing in the world.

  • Steve

    The Title of this article has a hidden message ”
    Does Tim Cook risk blowback “

  • Steve

    Has anyone noticed that in Apple advertising you will never see a clear representative of the LBGT community, you will see few blacks, Mexicans and Chinese or Indians. You will however see lot’s of Anglos, Japanese Asians, and pets. Apple Racial Bias? I think so. Tim needs to step up and apply some Affirmative Action to the Marketing department.

  • Born in the Valley

    Totally hypocritical to single out Indiana. Totally intolerant as well.

  • Maggie

    “Here are the 10 countries where homosexuality may be punished by death” …

    And Apple does business with at least 4 of them…

  • Tim Arnold

    Tim Cook. Champion of gay rights (at least in non-Islamic countries) after nearly a half century of being in the closet.

  • Armin Albarracin

    I believe a good gay is just somebody who lifes naturally
    without fear and I do not see a problem whatsoever in Tim getting public
    with this. Maybe living in Brighton makes me more tolerant, don’t know.
    I like the gay community and I very much appreciate them being here and
    also go to their places quite regularly and have some gay friends. And I
    not gay at all…

    I just wrote an article today on the subject here in my apple critic blog:

  • Joseph Kool

    Tim Cook should be more worried about finding a new product people actually want instead of using Apple as a means to bully people who don’t share his views on homosexuality.