Slashdot Mirror


Apple's App Store Accepts 'Gay Cure' App

parallel_prankster writes "Apple is under fire for approving a controversial app created by a religious organization — Exodus International. The app seeks to help gay individuals become heterosexual. It received a '4' rating from Apple, which indicates the company considered the app to contain 'no objectionable material.' The new smartphone app was released last week and is now available through iTunes. Exodus International claims to be 'the world's largest ministry to individuals and families impacted by homosexuality.' A petition has been launched by Truth Wins Out, which describes itself as a non-profit organisation that fights anti-gay religious extremism on the change.org website, asking Steve Jobs to intervene to remove the app."

794 comments

  1. Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Considering Apple is gay.

    1. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not Apple, mainly Steve Jobs.

      I mean you don't think he's dying of cancer do you? PROTIP: it's GAIDS

    2. Re:Amazing. by hackstraw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Considering "Jane" used to be "John" http://zagria.blogspot.com/2010_02_01_archive.html . Sexier pic: http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jane-fae

      Someone erroneously posted below that homosexuality is a preference. Its not. I had a friend who was a male married to a female with 2 kids and he was homosexual. AFAIK they had no plans for divorce. I work with a m2f transgender, and I've known many male and female homosexuals and bisexuals. Honestly, I can't understand it fully, but I just look at it as gender being a bimodal distribution that has overlap between the modes. Personally, I think it takes balls to go m2f and in no way be fooling anybody.

    3. Re:Amazing. by digitig · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Homosex is as natural as heterosex in that it is widely seen across species as a bonding behavior, but is condemned by religious morons because they don't allow pleasure that does not directly result in reproduction.

      It looks that way in the West, but hostility to homosexuality is common in socially conservative atheist cultures such as China too. It looks more as if cultural hostility to homosexuality leads to the religious taboo rather than the other way around. Which is what you'd expect if religion is invented to support prejudices. Don't blame religion for the prejudice, blame the prejudice for (that bit of) religion.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    4. Re:Amazing. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Rape is a serious crime in any society, including societies with no concept of a difference in rights based on gender, and even in matriarchal cultures.

      Every culture knows it is wrong, and there is a broad array of reasons you can choose to focus on while seeking or punishing the perp.

    5. Re:Amazing. by vertinox · · Score: 1

      Rape is a serious crime in any society, including societies with no concept of a difference in rights based on gender, and even in matriarchal cultures.

      What?! What?! What?!

      Are you saying all those right winged religious persons saying its women to blame for rape don't exist? (Islam and Christian)

      (Google "women to blame for rape" for your sources)

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    6. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Technically, it takes LOSING balls to go m2f #imjustsayin

    7. Re:Amazing. by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Exactly, and if you have ever been around someone who was gay you would know its not a "choice" or else people wouldn't choose it to escape horseshit like this from bigots like in TFA. It would be like saying some would "choose" to be born Jewish in pre WWII Europe, or "choose" to be born black in 1920s America. What horseshit and I've seen with my own two eyes it is horseshit.

      My youngest nephew (whom with his brother I consider my sons, as my sister developed a terminal illness after the second and wasn't able to raise them so I stepped up) is gay and frankly it was obvious almost from the time he could walk. His mannerisms, his voice, hell everything about him screamed "gay!" and he and his brother (which is as straight as straight can be) were raised side by side with NO differences in rearing. Nobody in my family said anything because we believe who you choose to love is YOUR business and it is OUR job to give the child a loving home, NOT to beat any one way of living into them.

      Well sure enough at 14 he said he "had a big announcement" and called a family meeting where he said "I'm gay" and I nearly died laughing at the reaction,as everyone was like "aaaand?" Even my 94 year old grandmom was like "Son, that news isn't exactly shocking, heck I'm nearly blind and even I could see that!". I'll always remember the way my friend Dale, who is ex USAF and can bench press some serious weight, put it when some punk overheard me talking about the youngest (and apparently didn't know Dale's little sister is a lesbian and likewise they knew almost since birth) when the punk said "I'd beat that boy straight!" Dale said 'Really, so if me and my buddy here take you out back and beat the living shit out of you for a couple of hours we can just turn you gay? I bet after we knocked them teeth out you'd be a good little cocksucker".

      And that is why TFA is total horseshit, it would be like someone expecting they could change me to where I'd look at some hairy guy the way I look at my little Cherokee princess sleeping in the bed down the hall. It ain't gonna happen, not in a million years and for all the tea in China. I'm just glad I found a wonderful woman with a wonderful old country family that only care about how you treat people and not who you love, because after my sis passed away they really went above and beyond to make my boys feel like family.

      Of course I'll never forget what my princess said after I took them to meet the boys and told her afterward the youngest was gay to see what her reaction would be and whether we had a future (because if it came down to a girl or the boys the girl would have to go, I don't abandon family) and she said "Hon, my glasses aren't THAT thick, and it doesn't change the fact he is a sweetie and my daughter (who loves having someone who has taste and loves shopping like she does) just adores him, does it?"

      Instead of trying to make everyone fit into your myopic world view, why not just treat them like people? And if it is family then you should damned well treat them like family and love and stick up for them instead of being a horse's ass like the group from TFA. If your God is so petty and spiteful that they would condemn a decent person to some eternal suffering because of who they love and nothing else? Well that isn't a God I want anything to do with, just keep him to yourself, thanks.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    8. Re:Amazing. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      If Apple were truly gay, their logo would be a banana.

    9. Re:Amazing. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Read it again.

    10. Re:Amazing. by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      Keep up postings like this, everywhere. Eventually, informed, the ignorants/ance will shrivel away.

    11. Re:Amazing. by Kr3m3Puff · · Score: 1

      I just wanted to say thank you. I wish the rest of the world thought like you did.

      --
      D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M.
    12. Re:Amazing. by PylonHead · · Score: 1

      This is awesome and exactly right. I'd say that I wish more people felt this way, but honestly.. more people do feel this way every day. The world is changing, and it's a lot better place to be gay than it was say 20 years ago, or 20 years before that.

      --
      # (/.);;
      - : float -> float -> float =
    13. Re:Amazing. by viodlos · · Score: 1

      It has a lot to do with religion. For example Thailand which is a buddhist country is very open towards sex change. In buddhism there's basically four genders - male, female, ladyboy and hermafrotides. People can be what they like to be and other people don't judge that.

      I don't have homosexual experiences, but I've been with ladyboys many times. I personally get turned on more by a female body, but that isn't to say some men don't look good. But ladyboys are there in between, and you get the added fun of a ladyboy really knowing how to pleasure you (of course, since she has been a guy too). On top of that some of them look absolutely amazing and have great bodies, boobs and the pre-op ladyboys dick is sometimes an added fun (or if you don't want that, she can just give you a blowjob). Post-op ladyboys then again are completely guys-turned-to-girls, and like some of them tend to say, "doctor makes better pussy than god".

    14. Re:Amazing. by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      If God is so fantastically amazing then how come people like John/Jane even exist?

      --
      No sig today...
    15. Re:Amazing. by drsmithy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Someone erroneously posted below that homosexuality is a preference. Its not.

      (This is in no way an ad hominem.)

      Even if it were , it's irrelevant. A person (and that includes faux persons like corporations) has no more right to discriminate against you because of your choice of bedmate(s) as they do because of your choice of cheese, or beer.

      Whether or not sexuality is choice is utterly irrelevant to anything. It has no meaningful impact on someone's ability to live their life, unless their purpose is discriminatory to start with.

    16. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a banana and two apples?

    17. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, why do you even exist? To troll? :)

    18. Re:Amazing. by badran · · Score: 1

      You can always ask those people (the ones who think it is a choice), when they chose not be gay.

      There is nothing wrong being gay or not being gay. But there is a big problem with forcing others to conform to some made up rules.

    19. Re:Amazing. by Chemisor · · Score: 1, Troll

      frankly it was obvious almost from the time he could walk. His mannerisms, his voice, hell everything about him screamed "gay!"

      So let me get this straight, this poor boy exhibited gender-inappropriate behaviour and you did nothing to correct it? Parenting is not just about things you do to a kid, it's also about the things you do not do. All kids act inappropriately now and then; when they do, they should be told to stop. A boy should be instructed how a male of the species is supposed to act - he has no gene for that. You did not, so he continued to act weirdly. Boys don't like boys who act weirdly and avoid them. A boy who grows up without having much contact with other boys will not experience any negative feedback about his behaviour and will continue becoming more and more different from them. Then he hits puberty and his alienation and mannerisms influence his sexual orientation. Good going, dad!

      the punk said "I'd beat that boy straight!"

      Yeah, as if brief violence could overturn 14 years of (unconscious) conditioning. It's like those "gay cure" groups who give gays electric shocks with gay porn. Sick and misguided...

      Instead of trying to make everyone fit into your myopic world view, why not just treat them like people?

      Yeah, why not? When a family member gets sick, do you just ostracise him? Do you insist that there is nothing wrong with him and ignore his problem? Or do you help him get well?

      If your God is so petty and spiteful that they would condemn a decent person to some eternal suffering because of who they love and nothing else?

      It is not whom they love, it's whom they have sex with. If he "loves" the wrong gender, at least he shouldn't have sex with it. It's not like it's hard. Getting laid is not something that just happens; it requires a great deal of hard work. If he dates women and with experience learns to enjoy sex with them, he won't be gay any more. Of course, nobody will help him do this, since the whole world seems to have declared that being gay is normal and nobody should dare correct this problem. Now that's tough breaks...

    20. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in no way associated with Exodus. I assume that I'm far more what you would call extreme then they are.

      Exactly, and if you have ever been around someone who was gay you would know its not a "choice" or else people wouldn't choose it to escape horseshit like this from bigots like in TFA.

      How is this relevant? Say that there is a gene that makes people more likely to murder. That does not make murder OK. That does not make it wrong to release an app that help people with the murder gene to avoid killing people.

      His mannerisms, his voice, hell everything about him screamed "gay!" and he and his brother (which is as straight as straight can be) were raised side by side with NO differences in rearing.

      You could have said almost the same if he had been blind instead of gay. It has no relevance for the morality of someone offering him a cure. To avoid confusion I want to be clear that I'm not claiming that being blind makes you more likely to commit certain sins like being homosexual does

      And that is why TFA is total horseshit, it would be like someone expecting they could change me to where I'd look at some hairy guy the way I look at my little Cherokee princess sleeping in the bed down the hall.

      Why is pointing out that men are hairy so common among relatives of homosexuals?

      Instead of trying to make everyone fit into your myopic world view, why not just treat them like people?

      We are treating them like people. If your definition of treating someone like people is to agree with them in all they do or to never point out that what they do is wrong you aren't treating me and other real Christians like people. I can also assure you that I'm not treating you like people by that definition.

      If your God is so petty and spiteful that they would condemn a decent person to some eternal suffering because of who they love and nothing else?

      I don't think that you will care about this distinction but to not let your heresy stand I must specify that He condemns them to eternal suffering for their sins, not for them being tempted by sin. That is: He condemns them for having sex with someone of their own sex and for fantasizing about it. He got plenty of other reasons to send them to hell as well. You are in the exact same situation as the unrepentant homosexual. In the short time it took you to write your post you committed many sins. Each one of them is enough for you to deserve eternal suffering. It's not only you by the way: "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;"

      Well that isn't a God I want anything to do with

      Your reaction could indicate that you may have had a small revelation of who God really is. The Bible is clear that there is not one that seeks God. (Romans 3:10) If you really have seem this you are, ironically, closer to salvation than many church goers. (The knowledge alone won't get you saved. Knowing how your evil nature is in conflict with God is a first step among many)

    21. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wat? You say that homosexuality is not a preference, then cite a "homosexual" who is married w/ 2 kids as an example. Must have been a shotgun wedding... and shotgun conceptions.

    22. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, using the word rape is a serious crime because in some countries women don't have the right to refuse.

    23. Re:Amazing. by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 1

      A person (and that includes faux persons like corporations) has no more right to discriminate against you because of your choice of bedmate(s) as they do because of your choice of cheese, or beer.

      Well, it's at least a grey area if you're going to share a cottage. Or, of course, if you are made of gruyere. Plus there's a lot of religious fanatics that despise someone who is simply not into cheeses. Ok, ok, I know the rules. Three puns. I'm out.

    24. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of husbands come out of the closet even after raising a family for years. It's called denial

      Of course, you may get suspicious if your husband is always upstairs masturbating to gay porn...

      "You are gay. You are a homosexual; the opposite of straight. I know it, your family knows it... DOGS know it - everyone seems to know it except YOU!"

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsVpdBIi1BU

    25. Re:Amazing. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      but is condemned by religious morons because they don't allow pleasure that does not directly result in reproduction

      Every "group" wishes to control others by limiting their access to pleasure. In some cases it's sex, in other cases it's recreational drug use or eating meat or drinking or smoking.

      It's all about control.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    26. Re:Amazing. by jobiwankanobi · · Score: 1

      You're just another example of misconceptions. Are you gay? Then you don't know what you're talking about. But idiots like you like to speak for gay people and let me tell you my opinion is "shut the fuck up." I'm tired of ignorant dumbfucks like yourself talking for me.

    27. Re:Amazing. by FST777 · · Score: 1

      I completely, totally and utterly agree. Also, as a Christian, I'd like to note that many Christians agree with this. Groups as in TFA are increasingly rare to find, especially in the educated parts of western society. They won't be missed when they're gone, I'll tell you...

      Parent's last two sentences sum it all up nicely. Thanks for those!

      --
      Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
    28. Re:Amazing. by The+Grand+Falloon · · Score: 1
      Ya know. Funny thing here. A dick fits in a mouth. A dick fits in an ass. Tongues and fingers work fantastically on pussies. In fact, for most women, they work better than dick. Male deer fuck male deer (sometimes while the receiver is giving it to a lady deer), and male dolphins give each other blowhole-jobs (seriously, way to go, guys).

      Seems to me homosexuality is a weird little option nature gives us. Obviously a species would not survive well if most of its members preferred their own sex over the opposite. Humans, however, are in no danger of extinction due to low birth rate, so I don't see any trouble.

      As to "If he dates women and with experience learns to enjoy sex with them, he won't be gay any more." That is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Plenty of gay men have fucked women and had a perfectly good time. It's less about who you fuck and more about who you're intimate with. I could fuck a dude. We could have a gay ol' time (sorry, I couldn't help myself). But I couldn't get all snuggly and intimate with the guy afterwards. I'm not wired that way. That's why I've slept with women and that's why I married a woman: because sex and intimacy are not the same thing, but they go very very well together.

      Now then: Gender inappropriate behavior? I have two sons. I won't deny that I hope for them to be strong and masculine, but I hope they find a balance. A man with no feminine traits is a macho asshole. Too many, and, well, I don't really want my boys to be big sissies, especially if they're gay. "Sure son, you can try out for the lead in Cats if you really want, but might I also suggest rugby? If you're gonna be gay, you should at least learn to smash a bigot's face in, and besides: fifteen strong, athletic young men? Sounds like a good place to meet someone."

      But when it comes down to it, I would rather my boys have too many "inappropriate feminine" traits than too many masculine. I would much rather have a dancing, prancing, lisping, limp-wristed, shoe-shopping queen for a son than a beer-swillin', gun-wavin, queer-hatin', woman-beatin' date rapist.

    29. Re:Amazing. by FST777 · · Score: 1

      Please, as a Christian to a Christian, please read this: http://www.soulforce.org/article/homosexuality-bible-gay-christian

      There are a few other scriptures that I want to throw at you right now, but I leave it at Matthew 7:1 and Matthew 22:39.

      --
      Free beer is never free as in speech. Free speech is always free as in beer.
    30. Re:Amazing. by The+Grand+Falloon · · Score: 1
      You know this is Slashdot, right? Near as I can tell, the very concept of Sin is irrelevant to most of the people here. Besides that, if we're to take the bible literally, particularly the Old Testament, your god is a genocidal murderer. I think we're quite justified in feeling morally superior to your deity.

      Also, he's not a heretic, because he's not a Christian. Were I a Christian, I would be a heretic, because my bible would have some fat magic marker through the entire Old Testament, and pretty much all of Paul.

    31. Re:Amazing. by The+Grand+Falloon · · Score: 1

      Bravo, Sir. Bravo.

    32. Re:Amazing. by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      But god forbid you choose the wrong football team :D

    33. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's less about who you fuck and more about who you're intimate with. I could fuck a dude. We could have a gay ol' time (sorry, I couldn't help myself). But I couldn't get all snuggly and intimate with the guy afterwards.

      Interesting; that is almost completely opposite my own experience. I enjoy make outs, cuddles, and emotional intimacy with both men and women, including (especially) in groups. But I have approximately zero interest in fucking men, and not enough interest to seek out fucking with a group.

    34. Re:Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I think it takes balls to go m2f

      Yea... I'd imagine it does.

    35. Re:Amazing. by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      > It would be like saying some would "choose" to be born Jewish in pre WWII Europe, or "choose" to be born black in 1920s America. What horseshit and I've seen with my own two eyes it is horseshit.

      Calling something horseshit doesn't make it so.

      I'll get extremely down modded for saying this, but as a mystic you are completely and TOTALLY ignorant of higher reality -- for some people their Higher Self DID chose those exact scenarios. Hell, even, the _Jewish_ Rabbi Ovadia Yosefan said the same thing: the 6 million Holocaust victims "were reincarnations of the souls of sinners, people who transgressed and did all sorts of things that should not be done. They had been reincarnated in order to atone." He was flamed by people too spiritually stupid to understand this advanced concept of Karma.

      Just because you are ignorant of what you are before you were born, or will be after you die, doesn't mean you have to _remain_ ignorant. Thankfully I don't have to waste time trying convince you -- you'll know this when you are dead.

      The rest of your post is great!

      > Instead of trying to make everyone fit into your myopic world view, why not just treat them like people?

      Agreed ! What people chose to believe is irrelevant -- they are still human beings, that have feelings, they live, eat, breath, and dream like the rest of us. They just happen to love in a little differently manner, but that love is just as real.

    36. Re:Amazing. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Personally, I think it takes balls to go m2f

      Truly magnificent choice of words there.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    37. Re:Amazing. by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      Ugh.

      A person ... has no more right to discriminate against you because of your choice of bedmate(s) as they do because of your choice of cheese, or beer.

      This is true in so far as any person has every right to discriminate against you for whatever reason they bloody well choose.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    38. Re:Amazing. by XLR8DST8 · · Score: 1

      i agree for the most part, sometimes you can tell & just know. but other times you can't. recently my brother came out, & you'd NEVER in a million years have known. i think there's a lot more closeted men in society than most people might realize.

      but your main point is true. NOT a choice. shit when has anybody woken up in the morning & said "shit, should i go suck some dick today? nah." just speaking for myself but i've never had that choice to make. it doesn't appeal to me. there is no dilemma. conversely i can't choose to not be attracted to Sofia Vergara. her name should be Sofia Viagra. bless her soul.
      admittedly i don't understand why my brother would find anderson cooper more attractive than sofia vergara but i definitely take his word for it. who the hell would claim something like that if it weren't just true? who the hell would consciously decide that?

      as with many things in this world, it is, because it just is.

      and to share a little more, yes it was shocking & disappointing. when it's your own brother you think about things, like, how you had always envisioned this person having children. having nieces & nephews. going to their wedding, etc. whatev. but the fact is, it's not gonna happen & just bc it's inconvenient to you doesn't make it anything one can or even should change.

      to be honest, if i COULD change it, i probably would. but i can't.

      i wonder how many of these 'pray the gay away' camps/organizations just screw the patients/victims up more? or how many victims have been screwed up more..

    39. Re:Amazing. by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Thank you and I hope you remember that when someone brings up the stereotype of southerners being nothing but bigots. Because here I am in the middle of the south (North Central AR) and after raising a gay child I quickly found out how far we have really come.

      Not only is most folks really accepting (hell I live in a town with even a Christian college and nobody blinks an eye at the nice lesbian couple that run the pizza parlor walking holding hands and kissing) but we have not one but two full blown gay communities (LR River market, Hot Springs Old District) where they are as obvious as anything you'd see on the coasts and nobody cares or raises a fuss.

      I was really worried when I took the boys to spend the week with me and Brenda at her parents in the mountains, sadly even I was thinking in the stereotype, but her whole family treated both boys like members of the family and not a word was spoken. Well there WAS one word said, Brenda's dad pulled me aside and asked "Is the youngest gay, if you don't mind me asking?" and I thought "here it comes" but when I said yes he just got a thoughtful look and said "Thought so. My third cousin Larry was gay, we knew it from when he was little too. How anybody could think they ain't born that way is beyond me" and that was that.

      So just treat them like family, give them lots of love and support (because it IS hard with all the bigots in this world, especially those that look through their bibles for reasons to hate) and NEVER try to force them to be how you "think" they should be. Sadly we have seen what that is like first hand because one my my youngest boy's schoolmates is gay, with his parents forcing him to go to boxing lessons and out on dates to "toughen him up" and I can already tell he'll be a raging alcoholic before the kid turns 20. Sadly his choices are that or never see his family again, as they have made it clear they won't have any "sissies" in their family.

      My boy after seeing that asked me point blank "Would you ever do that to me?" and I did what I always do, I told him the truth: I said "if you bring home a scumbag I'll be happy to point out you are dating a loser, just as my father was happy to point out when I was dating a drunken skank. if you bring home a decent person I won't treat him any different, same as you didn't treat my girl any different because I'm white and she's Cherokee." He said "Why would I treat Brenda bad just because she isn't the same as you? She is sweet and kind and you two are great together!" and I said "That's the point, it is what kind of person you are, not the outside that counts."

      I sure as hell never planned on having any kids, but sadly fate took my sister way too soon. But the oldest is now in his second year of Pre-Med and on the Dean's List and the youngest is trying to decide between his love of computer generated art and being a pastry chef. As long as they are happy and have a decent life that is what matters to me, shame others can't see what is important like that. life is too short to be filling it with hate and bigotry.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  2. No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So would a god bashing app be allowed?

    1. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every app is a god bashing app.

    2. Re:No objectionable material? by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      I don't know... but have they filtered out Mr Self Destruct by Nine Inch Nails or are they playing it over the Tannoy?

      i am the lover in your bed and i control you
      i am the sex that you provide and i control you

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    3. Re:No objectionable material? by stokessd · · Score: 2

      Christopher Hitchens is on iTunesU. Which is pro-Brain rather than pro-god. So in that regard, yes, it's very god bashing.

      http://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/christopher-hitchens-audio/id386252369

    4. Re:No objectionable material? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sometimes there's a fine line between "bashing" and "detracting" but it's there. An app that encourages gay people to not be gay is hardly bashing, even if you don't approve of the underlying assumptions.

    5. Re:No objectionable material? by fermion · · Score: 1
      Niether of these states ...is the worlds larges ministry o individuals and families impacted by Christianity".

      I would like such an app. In my town we have several so-called christian churches that tell families if they give money god will bless them. This of course is the heresy that prompted all protestant faiths. A number of people I have known have been kicked out of their so-called christian households because of what they did. This is the christian's god's love. Kick our family members with whom you disagree.

      The thing is I have not seen anything as hate filled as religious literature.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    6. Re:No objectionable material? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      That's a tad different. I don't have an iPhone so I can't look, but those are hardly objectionable to any reasonable person. Unlike sexual orientation one can change ones religious affiliations as frequently as one likes. Which makes it at least potentially productive, or at worst as productive as those people who think it's their job in life to save everybody, whether they want it or not.

    7. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An app that encourages gay people to not be gay is hardly bashing, even if you don't approve of the underlying assumptions.

      You mean an app based on the idea that homosexuality is immoral, and that such people need to be "fixed" is not gay bashing??

    8. Re:No objectionable material? by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      An app that encourages gay people to not be gay is hardly bashing, even if you don't approve of the underlying assumptions.

      You mean an app based on the idea that homosexuality is immoral, and that such people need to be "fixed" is not gay bashing??

      I'll also quote the summary prior to my response:

      A petition has been launched by Truth Wins Out, which describes itself as a non-profit organisation that fights anti-gay religious extremism on the change.org website, asking Steve Jobs to intervene to remove the app.

      What you and Truth Wins Out seem to desire is censorship. I really don't understand that, at all.

      It's really simple. If a homosexual person does not feel that homosexuality is wrong and does not view it as a problem that needs to be fixed, his or her option is ridiculously easy and requires zero effort: don't purchase/download this app.

      If a homosexual person does believe, for religious reasons, that homosexuality is wrong, why would you stop them from downloading this app by having it censored and removed from the App Store? Is this not a personal decision for that person to make? Do they not have the right to practice the religion of their choice? Or must they obtain your approval first?

      How does the presence of this app prevent someone from living the lifestyle of their choice? Simple answer: it doesn't. The effort to censor this app is far worse than anything the censors would find wrong with it. It's also an insult to the homosexual people you purport to protect. You're basically suggesting that their sexual orientation is so flimsy and non-genuine that it would be threatened by the mere option of downloading this app.

      Sadly, to many people "freedom" means "the freedom to do what I would approve of". I reject this notion. So long as we are talking about consenting adults, I believe people should be free to do whatever they like. It doesn't matter whether I would do the same, whether I approve of the practice, whether I endorse and support it. Anything else is just a thinly-veiled desire to control other people and force them to be like yourself. What a cowardly and pathetic desire.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    9. Re:No objectionable material? by darkpixel2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      An app that encourages gay people to not be gay is hardly bashing, even if you don't approve of the underlying assumptions.

      You mean an app based on the idea that homosexuality is immoral, and that such people need to be "fixed" is not gay bashing??

      Would you be equally against someone releasing an app to try and stop people from smoking?

      Either everyone is entitled to their beliefs and practices as long as they are not harming other people, or they aren't--at least that's how it's supposed to be in America.

      If I stand here and say "I think homosexuality is wrong", does it harm you? No. To (probably poorly) quote Jefferson: It neither picks your pocket or breaks your leg.

      --
      There's no place like ::1 (I've completed my transition to IPv6)
    10. Re:No objectionable material? by Auroch · · Score: 1

      Christopher Hitchens is on iTunesU. Which is pro-Brain rather than pro-god. So in that regard, yes, it's very god bashing.

      http://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/christopher-hitchens-audio/id386252369

      Pro-Brain, eh? I wonder which side of falsely-dichotomization of this argument you're on.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    11. Re:No objectionable material? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Troll

      What you and Truth Wins Out seem to desire is censorship. I

      A petition is not censorship. It is a request from customers to remove something very objectionable. Hate speech, in fact.

      The petition, and a boycott to follow, is simply the "free market" exerting its influence on corporate behavior. I can't imagine something that is a better example of free market behavior: get together and say you will not purchase a product until the company fixes something.

      And don't believe for a second that Apple isn't concerned about losing the gay market share. The gay community is better organized and more aware than most social groups. It's because they've had to be. If there's even a hint of boycott from the gay community, Apple will drop this app like a hot potato. Who's going to buy their products if the gays don't? The people who have time on their hands to be hating gay people probably can't afford an iPhone or iPad.

      The fundamentalist Christian community doesn't hesitate to threaten boycotts. A few years ago they threatened to boycott Ford because Ford advertised in a gay publication. It didn't work because there's not nearly as many of the real hard-core religious nuts as we're led to believe, and they don't have the economic power of the homosexual community which has a lot of economic impact, culturally and financially.

      What this really shows is the fatal flaw in the "walled garden". The real solution to the "gay-hating app" is to have a hundred apps that present a positive view of variety in sexual preference. Then you can really let the free market work it out. The haters get to hate, and the rest of us can just laugh at them (and hopefully keep a list of their names in a file somewhere in case they decide to raise the ugliness-level). But in a walled garden, where Apple is going to "curate" the experience for us all, then they're going to have to tread very lightly.

      I actually always had a feeling that the limitations on free speech would be the ultimate demise of the walled garden. We've always known that technology, like the internet, treats censorship (and hate) like damage and routes around it. There will be more examples of Apple's "curating" that will offend large numbers of people, and those people will start to look for other options (and other options will appear). And to the extent that Android and any other platform tries to pull the same "curating" they too will fall. And to the extent that the telecoms, working with the smartphone manufacturers, try to lock down what's run on their network, I think we're going to see new models for telecommunications arise that will be outside their purview. With the assault on Net Neutrality, and the walled garden approach, it plays right into the hands of what the new corporatist governance wants: complete control over the means of communication: huge corporations make the phones and huge corporations own the network. They both own the government. The result is limitations on freedom. This is an objection to walled gardens that is seldom talked about, and yet is the most important objection of all. I just don't see the technical limitations that require walled gardens existing too far into the future. If they do, that will probably mean that things have gotten really really a lot worse.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    12. Re:No objectionable material? by mysidia · · Score: 0

      Would you be equally against someone releasing an app to try and stop people from smoking?

      I talked to a friend who works for a cigarette company, and he found the notion as an app to 'try and stop people from smoking' to be outrageous.

      I'm sure should such an app emerge, there would be many cries for Apple to pull the app out of respect for smokers' religion.

    13. Re:No objectionable material? by braeldiil · · Score: 0

      It's not censorship. It's all Freedom of Speech, all the way down. The Truth Wins Out crowd is using their free speech to oppose the webapp, both by calling it ingorant and bigoted, and by lobbying Apple and Steve Jobs. They aren't asking Apple to censor the app; they're asking Apple to exercise their editorial control over the app store and remove it as not reflecting the "Apple values". Editorial control is a cornerstone of Freedom of Speech; there's no right to make someone else say something for you. You may think Apple shouldn't exercise editorial control over the app store in this way - I might even agree. But they clearly do - see the ban on "Adult" apps. The arguement is that this app makes them look at least as bad as a Playboy app would, and should be removed for the same reasons.

    14. Re:No objectionable material? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      Would you be equally against someone releasing an app to try and stop people from smoking?

      But there are people out there who want to quite smoking.

      People who are gay don't want to stop being gay. The ones you see in the "pray the gay away" programs are usually put there by social pressure from outside, and they never, ever work. I can guarantee, this "stop being gay" app was not created by well-adjusted former gay people, but either by regular old haters or twisted Larry Craig types who are just so pissed that they can't run out and suck a dick that they want to stop everyone who can. These people generally label themselves "Republicans" or "Christians". You can generally identify them by how often they repeat "I love my wife and I am not gay" at press conferences.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    15. Re:No objectionable material? by Oligonicella · · Score: 0

      Don't download it. Said by a very hare core atheist of some 40+ years.

    16. Re:No objectionable material? by tomhudson · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Homosexuality is unnatural, as in not a normal human trait.

      Reality disagrees. Apparently it IS a normal human trait, for plenty of people. "Normal" is not synonymous with the majority". Or are you going to say that blue-eyed, left-handed, white-skinned people are unnatural and that these are not normal human traits?

      If you had said it wasn't normal for YOU, nobody would object. Nobody is saying everyone should be gay or lesbian or straight or whatever, ... oops, the fundies at exodus ARE saying everyone should be straight. :-(

    17. Re:No objectionable material? by mysidia · · Score: 0

      Reality disagrees. Apparently it IS a normal human trait, for plenty of people. "Normal" is not synonymous with the majority". Or are you going to say that blue-eyed, left-handed, white-skinned people are unnatural and that these are not normal human traits?

      Color of eyes, hand preference, and skin color vary without difference in behavior or other negative effects.

      On the other hand, homosexuality = inability to reproduce. Because there is no natural way that two women or two women reproduce.

      Just because "plenty" of people have an irregular trait does not make it normal.

      If the entire population became homosexual, civilization as we knew it would end within a few generations, since there would be no new births.

    18. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're full of shit.

    19. Re:No objectionable material? by colinrichardday · · Score: 2

      In my town we have several so-called christian churches that tell families if they give money god will bless them. This of course is the heresy that prompted all protestant faiths.

      As opposed to the Catholic Church, which said that if you gave them money, your loved ones would be freed from Purgatory?

    20. Re:No objectionable material? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Of course, God is also unnatural in the sense of being supernatural. If religion is going to denigrate nature by positing the supernatural, don't be surprised that people don't care about nature.

    21. Re:No objectionable material? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Because bashing an imaginary being is exactly like bashing a real live human being.

    22. Re:No objectionable material? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      That's just crazy. Everyone knows god doesn't bless you in return for money. He does it in return for you drinking his son's blood and eating his bones and then saying a bunch of hail mary's while obsessively fondling a string of cheap beads. Unless you wear clothing made of mixed textiles or are in the presence of a menstruating woman, of course. Then there's nothing he can do for you.

    23. Re:No objectionable material? by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      If the entire population became homosexual, civilization as we knew it would end within a few generations, since there would be no new births.

      I take it you don't actually know real gay people, then. Some of the ones I do have biological children of their own. I suspect it's not all that rare.

      Like it or not, science and human reason took us out of the normal flow of evolution a long, long time ago.

    24. Re:No objectionable material? by Rei · · Score: 2

      Right. Because what the world needs more than anything else is more reproducing people, right?

      Catholic priests don't reproduce, either. Should we wipe out the Catholic Church, too?

      --
      Man on crucifix terrorizes church, demands they eat his flesh and blood. Details at 11.
    25. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      In the minds of some Christians, any time you do something that doesn't "glorify God", you're basically bashing him. Essentially, you're supposed to be devoting as much waking time as possible to him in some way, either thinking about him, praying to him, converting other people to your religion, etc. So playing a game that has no religious content, or listening to non-Christian music is bad because you could spend that time doing something religious instead.

    26. Re:No objectionable material? by tompaulco · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In my town we have several so-called christian churches that tell families if they give money god will bless them.
      How dare they? Everyone knows pastors are supposed to work for free, same as game programmers and rock musicians.
      I believe that we should give money to the Church, not for the pastor's sake, but because the Church is chartered by the government (via tax-free status) to be charitable to the poor and otherwise needy, and that is what the Church is supposed to do. If they don't then the government will do it, and the government traditionally does a horrible job of administering help to the needy.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    27. Re:No objectionable material? by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      I imagine a "cure for religion" app would be allowed, but someone go make it and find out.

    28. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 0

      I think you're missing his point. Back in Martin Luther's time, you were supposed to give money to the Church to pay for your sins, etc.. From the WIkipedia article about Martin Luther: "In 1516–17, Johann Tetzel, a Dominican friar and papal commissioner for indulgences, was sent to Germany by the Roman Catholic Church to sell indulgences to raise money to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. Roman Catholic theology stated that faith alone, whether fiduciary or dogmatic, cannot justify man; and that only such faith as is active in charity and good works (fides caritate formata) can justify man. The benefits of good works could be obtained by donating money to the church." Luther opposed this, and was excommunicated and declared a heretic.

      Fast-forward to today, and Protestant evangelical Christian churches are teaching that you must give money to God (to the church actually) to be blessed, and the more money, the better. Doesn't matter if you're poor, you have to "give until hit hurts, and then give some more!" (I actually heard this at some Church I was dragged into, that was full of very poor people), and that if you don't give your 10% minimum, then God will turn his back on you. There's a term for this, it's called "Prosperity Doctrine": these churches teach that if you give more money to the church, that you will be blessed with financial rewards. So it doesn't matter if giving 10% of your minimum-wage paycheck will result in you not having enough money left over to pay your rent, you just need to give it anyway, and God will magically make things work out for you, and if they don't and you get evicted, it's because "you didn't have enough faith".

      Christianity is nothing but a way of scamming people for money.

    29. Re:No objectionable material? by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      Nature would like to call your attention to worker bees. By your logic, they're abominations.

      Maybe humans need someone to win Project Runway (or, to slashdot this up, to be Alan Turing) just as queen bees need someone to make the honey.

    30. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Gay people usually have a lot of spending money, because they don't have children, and usually go for better-paying jobs. Moreover, who's a bigger consumer/fan of Apple products, gays or fundamentalist religious zealots? Seriously, gay people frequently like stylish things, and Apple's stuff appeals to them, so they're really shooting themselves in the foot here. Fundie Christians tend to be much more budget-conscious, which means they're more likely to buy cheaper competitors. This was a really boneheaded move by Apple.

      Why all the gays haven't packed up and moved to Canada, I have no idea. America seems to be sliding into fundamentalism, and at a time when the national deficit is over $14 trillion and we are having all kinds of economic problems, half or more of the country is more worried about trying to stamp out homosexuality than anything else. I want to get out myself; this country wasn't so full of fundies 20 years ago, but now they're outnumbering the regular Protestant denominations, because apparently their message of hate and intolerance sells better than the "mainstream" Protestant churches, where they don't devote any energy to it.

    31. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Shrug) There's a clear and demonstrable inverse correlation between religiosity and IQ. Do you have any insight into the matter that doesn't involve wishful thinking and handwaving?

    32. Re:No objectionable material? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      The problem is that when you assume the role of making editorial decisions, you have to be consistent and you assume a certain level of responsibility. I think people who spread this bullshit hurt a lot of people by spreading confusion and prolonging their suffering through a life of self loathing. However, stupid as it may be, the app has every right to exist and people have every right to use it or not use it. The problem is that if you accept one off-putting or even vile thing, who are you to refuse another?

    33. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What this really shows is the fatal flaw in the "walled garden". The real solution to the "gay-hating app" is to have a hundred apps that present a positive view of variety in sexual preference.

      How so? Is Apple blocking such apps?

    34. Re:No objectionable material? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Sadly, to many people "freedom" means "the freedom to do what I would approve of". I reject this notion. So long as we are talking about consenting adults, I believe people should be free to do whatever they like. It doesn't matter whether I would do the same, whether I approve of the practice, whether I endorse and support it. Anything else is just a thinly-veiled desire to control other people and force them to be like yourself. What a cowardly and pathetic desire.

      Fundamentally, you're saying that a person's personal preference to be gay should override a society's collective preference to not approve gays. Unfortunately we've not been able to promote this into a priniciple. If I dump my trash in the forest, it'll be illegal. We've decided that our collective desire to keep the forest clean should override my personal desire to dump trash. This is a non-trivial problem.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    35. Re:No objectionable material? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Not really seeing the comparison here w/ your analogy.

      Dumping your trash in the forest would defile what is ostensibly common property, which is why it is illegal. Someone presenting an opposing view in a marketplace does no such thing.

      The marketplace itself decides "collective desire", not ideology - and the funniest part is, that "collective desire" is anything but homogeneous (otherwise we'd all be ravenous fans of Ke$ha... let that thought sink in for a minute.)

      Besides - the whole idea of anyone (or any group) daring to define "collective desire" (let alone try to enforce it) is pretty repugnant to anyone who desires the freedom to explore their own being and to (peacefully) maximize their own individual potential.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    36. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fundamentally, you're saying that a person's personal preference to be gay should override a society's collective preference to not approve gays.

      As if society's "approval" matters one way or another?

      Gays would have absolutely no problem living in US society and fitting in fine, if it weren't for the bigotry and "disapproval" of others. The problem lies solely with those who think they have a right to determine how others should live. Think about that.

    37. Re:No objectionable material? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      People who are gay don't want to stop being gay.

      Most gay folk that I know have tried to 'stop being gay', until they finally accepted themselves for who they are. It's almost part of the process, I figure.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    38. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You know much hay has been made that church goers give more to chariy. I would argue much of the money church goers give does not go to the poor, but to pay for real estate and salaries for ministers and coaches and he like. Basically church goers give money to pay for servies they receive, but as a tax deduction. Things like sermons, socilal nights, gymnasiums, concert halls, etc.

      OTOH, non-church goes tend o give money to services that have no direct impact on their lives. MSF helping people across he world, local food pantries, save the earth groups, etc. I don't see how giving money so your kids have a playground is charity. Sure other kids can use it, if they agree to listen to your message.

    39. Re:No objectionable material? by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So would a god bashing app be allowed?

      I would imagine so. Frankly, people should be applauding the fact that Apple has way loosened up on their editorial stance of the App Store and have started letting things in that are more risque and potentially offensive. It's not like they automatically install apps to your phone, you still have to go out and download it yourself. And this is certainly not an app that you will find in an Apple commercial (although I think that would be hilarious), but that doesn't mean they should have rejected it.

      Freedom of speech goes in every direction, people. I know many of you think that freedom of speech should only count for what YOU think and what YOU have to say, but it doesn't. Sorry.

      (I completely respect the gay community and disagree with the 'Gay Cure' app, but censorship of any kind is an evil thing that only leads to more censorship. Freedom for all is more important than emotional comfort for some.)

    40. Re:No objectionable material? by kenj0418 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Right. Because what the world needs more than anything else is more reproducing people, right?

      The post you are replying to appears to have been attempting to say that that homosexuality is not natural because there is no evolutionary advantage to a lifestyle that precludes procreating. I'm no biologist, but I can certainly see an advantage to the larger community in behavior that reduces the birth rate when population density is high. Also, maybe having a gay aunt or uncle increased the reproductive chances of the nieces or nephews. Just because the GP couldn't think of an evolutionary benefit, doesn't mean there isn't/wasn't one.

      Besides, who cares if its 'natural' or not. You know what else isn't natural: computers, refrigeration, espresso, etc. Lets not use 'its unnatural' as a criteria for whether something is acceptable or not.

    41. Re:No objectionable material? by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 3, Informative

      You should remember that just because some trait does not lend itself well to reproduction does not meant that trait is unnatural. If it was truly "unnatural" then it wouldn't occur in nature at all. However, it does occur in nature, and not only among humans.

      Additionally, the human race is slowly evolving into something more than the primitive beings you seem to think we should be. Sooner or later it will become easy for gay couples to reproduce. Whether or not you consider it "natural" is of no consequence. After all, modern people enjoy so many things that are not natural and we would be loathe to suddenly have to do without them. In fact, most everything you come into contact with on a daily basis is not "natural."

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    42. Re:No objectionable material? by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 1

      As the old saying goes, "sin against god is one thing, sin against man is worse." I even like that one despite being an atheist.

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    43. Re:No objectionable material? by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are 2.1 billion "Christians" on the planet.

      Some are Mormons who believe that if they are married in a Mormon temple, they can enter the third level of heaven and become God themselves, creating planets of billions of worshipers.

      Some are Catholics, and believe in intercessory prayer, where you can't pray directly to God, even though that contradicts the entire Bible. You are dependent wholly on the Church still. You get forgiveness through the Church (not God) and must confess sins to a priest.

      Some are Christian Scientists who believe 95% of the Bible is a lie, and that we don't really exist. Sin is going to a hospital, because it is believing the lie that physical reality is real.

      Some are the Westboro Baptist Church, who ignore 99% of the Bible, and focus largely on 1 verse which is recorded only for historical purposes, which was a law the Jews made for themselves (as opposed to a commandment from God). But frankly, they believe it is their duty to celebrate the death of innocent people because God wants everyone to die for tolerating homosexuality. Every American in particular really needs to die, except for Westboro Baptist Church.

      Some, like Trinity Broadcasting believe in bilking innocent people out money. Tons of televangelists seem to believe that you can tell people that you will die unless people give you millions, because God commanded it. And those millions better go into your pocket directly.

      And some Christians believe in peace, forgiveness, tolerance, decency, trying to follow Christ's example, and non-judgementalism.

      Lumping all 2.1 billion Christians on the earth in one bucket isn't easy.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    44. Re:No objectionable material? by Enderandrew · · Score: 2

      You're mixing it up. Only the Hasidic Jews care about mixed textiles or menstruating women, as those were Jewish laws invented for the Jews.

      The Catholic Church determined you need to focus on rote prayer to outside figures (intercessory prayer). The rosary may have been borrowed from outside culture. Catholicism claims to have invented in the 15th century, despite the number 108 having meaning in other religions for thousands of years.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108_(number)#Religion_and_the_arts

      I don't know of any group that eats Christ's bones in particular. The eucharist, or Communion bread (seen differently in different circles) is either the supposed literal, or metaphorical body of Christ. I haven't ever heard it called the bones specifically though.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    45. Re:No objectionable material? by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      I am curious -- how is homosexuality an illness?

      Also, homosexuality happens in many other species, and seeing as it is looking more and more to have a biological basis, I doubt that it's truly "unnatural" -- if happens because of something that can naturally happen, then it's natural.

    46. Re:No objectionable material? by Enderandrew · · Score: 1

      It depends on your definition of bashing.

      Is it offensive to gays? Certainly. But it suggests that you "cure" gays through peace, love and understanding. I'd agree it is wrong in that I don't think homosexuality is a simple choice, a flip you easily switch. But in comparison to those whose suggest you need to hunt down and beat, prosecute and kill gays, it is considerably more lenient. The app isn't advocating the hatred and persecution of gays.

      I think the app is sad, pathetic and offensive. But I wouldn't necessarily suggest it advocates "bashing".

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    47. Re:No objectionable material? by Draek · · Score: 1

      What's the name of the guy getting bashed here? oh, that's right, it's a "group". Much like the group of people that believe in the existence of said imaginary being, right? right.

      Yes, both situations are exactly alike, stop looking for excuses to bash one and protect the other just because you have an axe to grind.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    48. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they don't then the government will do it, and the government traditionally does a horrible job of administering help to the needy.

      Yeah, and at least when churches help the needy, they don't try to force the recipients to believe in long-disproved fantasies about how the world works, like Trickle-Down Economics or Global Warming Denialism.

    49. Re:No objectionable material? by Auroch · · Score: 2

      (Shrug) There's a clear and demonstrable inverse correlation between religiosity and IQ. Do you have any insight into the matter that doesn't involve wishful thinking and handwaving?

      There's also a clear and demonstrable inverse correlation between wealth and happiness. And IQ and happiness. Do you have any insight that doesn't trivialize and avoid the topic at hand?

      There *is* a false dichotomy between "Pro-brain" (as the OP said) and "pro-god". If einstein believing in god doesn't disprove your handwaiving and wishful thinking, I'm not sure what will.

      I can't "prove" a theory, but I can easily "disprove" one. That's the problem with fundamentalist religion nuts. They don't understand that there is no absolute proof without absolute knowledge, and absolute knowledge is beyond the grasp of humanity... for the moment.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    50. Re:No objectionable material? by Rei · · Score: 2

      Not to mention that homosexuality is widespread in the animal kingdom anyway. So unless they have some other definition of "natural"...

      --
      Man on crucifix terrorizes church, demands they eat his flesh and blood. Details at 11.
    51. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 0

      I'm not lumping all the world's Christians together, only the American ones. Here in America, evangelical Christianity such as that preached by Trinity Broadcasting, now accounts for a majority of all Christians here, and probably about 40% of the population. "Mainstream" protestants are now a minority of Christians here. The WBC, Mormons, Christian Scientists, etc. are all very small in comparison (WBC in particular is tiny, only a few dozen people probably).

      And some Christians believe in peace, forgiveness, tolerance, decency, trying to follow Christ's example, and non-judgementalism.

      Yeah, but not many of those live here in America. Most Christians here have decided it's more important to focus on issues like homosexuality and gay marriage than to bother with that tolerance and forgiveness stuff.

    52. Re:No objectionable material? by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Informative

      The network gets a 0.3 rating in its best time slot. Less than 1% of the population is watching it.

      That is a far cry from a majority/40% you claim.

      Vocal minorities can easily seem like the majority because they extreme and vocal. That doesn't actually make them a majority.

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    53. Re:No objectionable material? by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's not directly bashing, but it is implicitly supporting a position typically used in bashing, that gay is purely a lifestyle choice. Framed in religious terms, it claims that gay is NOT the way God mad some people, it is their ongoing choice to sin due to moral weakness. This is a position supported by the group that released the app.

      It's no more bashing than an app that tells 'sinful' black people that if they pray really hard they can become 'virtuous' white people. (I feel like I should wash my hands just for typing that frankly)

    54. Re:No objectionable material? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      The problem is that when you assume the role of making editorial decisions, you have to be consistent

      If you're just going to be consistent and fair, what's the point of being editorial? That's the whole point of having editors, to make sure content matches the company agenda.

    55. Re:No objectionable material? by LordLimecat · · Score: 2

      Would you say that the first amendment is a good thing, so long as the only things that are allowed to be expressed are those you agree with?

      If you condemn folks for having a religious view on homosexuality, you brand yourself a hypocrite-- you would force your own views on others in the name of promoting free speech.

    56. Re:No objectionable material? by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      You're lumping most children of Christians into the Christian bucket if you come up with 2.1B. Here in the USA you can find all sorts of people who will associate their parents religion as if it's an ethnicity, but if you actually engage them in a conversation about religion you find out they firmly reject religion in general, and only have a vague belief in some unknown "higher power" and their only Faith is that if they try to be a "good person" they will get whatever sort of credit is available, if any.

    57. Re:No objectionable material? by curunir · · Score: 1

      Homosexuality is unnatural, as in not a normal human trait.

      How do you know it's not a natural response to over population or other challenges? What if, at a certain point, it stops being advantageous to pass down your own genes and starts being advantageous to become part of a community providing for children? A quick search turns up a study that claims that for each older brother, a male child is be 33% more likely to be gay...something like that could be explained by positing that, under certain circumstances, having more providers for each child rather than more children with certain genes maximizes the chances that a child will reach childbearing age and successfully pass down their genes.

      Whatever the cause, whether genetic or the result of child rearing, there's ample evidence that by the time a sexual identity emerges, it's not a choice. If a phenomenon is this widespread, how is it possible for it not to be natural? The answer is that it isn't possible...it's a behavioral trait that we've evolved to deal with certain situations that we don't yet fully understand and, judging by the fact that it's survived to this point, it provides some advantage in successful procreation. Whether that advantage is still applicable to today's society is another matter, but that has no bearing on whether it's a natural occurrence.

      --
      "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"
    58. Re:No objectionable material? by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      A true Christian priest following the example Jesus set for his followers would know that you're allowed to use donations to buy a donkey and ride it to your destination to spread the word, but once you get their, you should give it to the poor.

      And you're allowed to wear sandals, but you're not supposed to own them.

      You're not supposed to buy or even rent a house, you're supposed to live with those who will take you in, in exchange for sharing the Word.

      So yes, a pastor is supposed to work, not for free, but free of monetary reward.

    59. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not lumping all the world's Christians together, only the American ones.

      Oh, well, that's *much* better. Just a couple hundred million instead of a couple billion. (eyeroll) (facepalm) (double facepalm)

      You're a fucking bigot.

    60. Re:No objectionable material? by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      There's also a clear and demonstrable inverse correlation between wealth and happiness. And IQ and happiness. Do you have any insight that doesn't trivialize and avoid the topic at hand?

      I do. A general lack of correlation does not mean demonstrable negative correlation.

      If einstein believing in god doesn't disprove your handwaiving and wishful thinking, I'm not sure what will.

      Einstein believed in a non-personal watchmaker god with no influence beyond the creation of the universe asfaik. About as close as you can get to atheism without actually being one.

      I mean, wow, is this "use false internet rumors in an argument" day or something?

    61. Re:No objectionable material? by wickedskaman · · Score: 1

      I was born sterile, you insensitive clod!

      --
      Sand's overrated... it's just tiny little rocks.
    62. Re:No objectionable material? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1, Troll

      And some Christians believe in peace, forgiveness, tolerance, decency, trying to follow Christ's example, and non-judgementalism.

      No, those are actually atheists.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    63. Re:No objectionable material? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      So they are fine with an app bashing the Bible and Christianity, but not anything bashing the Quran and Mohammed...

      http://macdailynews.com/2010/05/20/apple_pulls_islam_muhammad_app_from_app_store_with_video/

      I mean, not that I care in the slightest for either religion, but their hypocritical free-speech-when-it's-convenient defense is getting old...

    64. Re:No objectionable material? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      For all practical purposes (and considering that Einstein had to deal with society obsessed with religion), Einstein's mentioning of god at most counts as a metaphor for nature.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    65. Re:No objectionable material? by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      Yep... The other problem may be down to advertising and fitness for purpose. I'm not sure how hate or discrimination laws work in the USA given the whole slavery thing.

      So the problem are:
      1: it's presumably commercial or would have that appearance
      2: May make false claims
      3: May discriminate against someones natural being.
      4: Apple already discriminates agaist lush wet pussy and arse banging pics or what have you and lots of other stuff... if their gona be picky... well they should be.

      I have no problem with fag bashers being allowed to say that poofs will all die from AIDS and have to wear but plugs for the rest of their life.
      Or even that according to their fictitious God they will burn in hell when they die.

      I do have a problem when I can look at wet pussy being thumped by a 12 inch dildo whilst the bitch is hanging from barb wire ripping her clit apart.

      I've got to cure my love of a mans cock somehow.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    66. Re:No objectionable material? by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      well that depends, some are more like QC, testers and bug fixers.. maybe snipping a few broken features or getting the performance and UI correct.

      Others are like FOX.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    67. Re:No objectionable material? by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      I can't "prove" a theory, but I can easily "disprove" one. That's the problem with fundamentalist religion nuts. They don't understand that there is no absolute proof without absolute knowledge, and absolute knowledge is beyond the grasp of humanity... for the moment.

      There is no such thing as absolute knowledge since there is always some potential hole in your observations. I mean that not even getting into the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Unless everything is just one giant simulation and even then one could claim our knowledge about the simulation is flawed. The usual example being that one can always claim there's an invisible and intangible dragon in their garage and no matter what you do you cannot disprove it (since they'll add another caveat to how it's undetectable)

      On that same note, there are also infinite scientific theories to explain any set of observations. Just take any theory and add "and a magical undetectable unicorn causes it to happen" to make another one. Occam's razor is generally used to deal with this problem but it will never go away.

    68. Re:No objectionable material? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      Homosexuality is unnatural, as in not a normal human trait

      So is driving a car. So is living to 110. So is wearing polyester. So is plastic surgery, or even changing hair color. The point?

    69. Re:No objectionable material? by rohan972 · · Score: 1

      I take it you don't actually know real gay people, then. Some of the ones I do have biological children of their own. I suspect it's not all that rare.

      Since homosexuals with biological children are clearly able to be sexually aroused by the opposite sex (well, male homosexuals anyway, a lesbian could get pregnant without being aroused, not requiring an erection) then how can their homosexuality be said to be a trait and not a choice?
      It seems to me that for some people homosexuality is a choice, while for others it seems to be something they have no control over. For those in the first group, they may have a use for this app.

    70. Re:No objectionable material? by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 2

      Yes, just like if everyone was born female, civilization would end - damn them lasses! Look up "equilibrium" in any textbook on evolution (no, touching them doesn't send you to Hell, and it's a little more complicated than what you gleaned from Sunday School vitriol), and you'll learn all sorts of fascinating examples, from the familiar sterile worker ants to bonobos that spend a LOT of time masturbating in public... all to the benefit of their genes (see, you're not a useless impotent wanker after all). The *natural* world is truly remarkable and enlightening, exceptionally so when compared to dull and frivolous mythologies. Get beyond your /. Asperger's and you'll see there is plenty to learn that doesn't fit the jerks of your knees.

    71. Re:No objectionable material? by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      I have an app that will help you with erectile dysfunction, but Apple banned it...

    72. Re:No objectionable material? by daath93 · · Score: 2

      The lack of concern over if a gay person might accidentally be searching for color swatch apps and stumble over a dangerous app that will teach them the benefits of heterosexual unions does not make one "gay hating" or by inference some other unemployed or under-deserving sub-human. It simply means you should spend more time minding your own f'n business and less time minding someone elses, regardless of your ideological bent.

      I'm not gay, I'm not friends with anyone who is gay, but I don't believe what gay people do is any of my business and wish you would stop f'n waving flags all over the place about it. When I was a lad, i dressed funny, then i would get all upset at people cause they would lable me, point, laugh, call names. Since the dawn of time people who are different have always been singled out. It happens all throughout the animal kingdom.

      The crazy thing about this is most people who are extremist pro-gay are also the same people going on about climate change and animal rights. Well here's your big chance....where in the animal kingdom does a minority member of any species force the rest of its species to be okay with its minority behavior?

      So, hump what you want, but just realize the rest of the pack thinks your dick smells like ass, and may laugh at you for it.

    73. Re:No objectionable material? by RoccamOccam · · Score: 1

      just like if everyone was born female, civilization would end

      [obligatory] Life, uh ... finds a way.

    74. Re:No objectionable material? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's entirely fair. Martin Luther, for example, risked his life to put a stop to this kind of exploitation. Also, Jesus was killed for opposing this kind of thing. So, the roots of Christianity are firmly opposed to this kind of exploitation, even if the church "leaders" are for it.

    75. Re:No objectionable material? by Instine · · Score: 1

      Yep:

      Atheist Pocket Debater: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/atheist-pocket-debater/id356411065?mt=8

      BibleThumper: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/biblethumper/id334558214?mt=

      Not the same dude. One is a browser of arguments. I.e. rational discourse. The other may be seen as God bashing, but it purely uses the Bible's words to do so. That's like saying Principia Mathematica Abridged Notes is Physics bashing.

      Niether, irrationally assumes a significant proportion of the population are in need of being 'cured' of their genetic condition (which is, of course, as best science can tell, currently, practically impossible - whether it's desirable or not).

      "cure" is a medical term. Medicine is a scientific and beautifully empirical endeavor. Religion is not. Clouding the two is a kin to using pseudo science to sell anti aging cream, but with MUCH more significant ramifications for the victims of the deception. Rather than keeping a few wrinkles and loosing a few bucks, you get psychologically traumatized. Potentially for life, often by your own family.

      I believe such deception should be legally prevented. I still think the trades description act should allow for prosecution of this kind of deception.

      --
      Because you can - or because you should?
    76. Re:No objectionable material? by viracochas · · Score: 2

      Some are Catholics, and believe in intercessory prayer, where you can't pray directly to God, even though that contradicts the entire Bible. You are dependent wholly on the Church still. You get forgiveness through the Church (not God) and must confess sins to a priest.

      Where do you get that idea? The primal Catholic prayer is Pater Noster, directed directly to God. Nothing stops you from praying directly to God if you so choose, or Jesus, or the Holy Spirit. Prayers of intercession are a personal choice.

      In modern Protestantism the vast majority of prayers are directed only to Jesus, not the rest of the Trinity.

    77. Re:No objectionable material? by kiddygrinder · · Score: 1

      i'd say a lot of homosexual people would like to not have to deal with the stigma of being who they are, i don't think not wanting to be gay is really being anti-gay.

      --
      This is a joke. I am joking. Joke joke joke.
    78. Re:No objectionable material? by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      That is complete and utter bollocks, sorry.

      Homosexuality exists in nature. Deal with it.

    79. Re:No objectionable material? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Most gay folk that I know have tried to 'stop being gay', until they finally accepted themselves for who they are. It's almost part of the process, I figure.

      But did they try to stop because they wanted to stop being gay or because of fear of the reaction of family and peers?

      Have you ever wanted to stop being hetero? [I know the potential for jokes in answering that question is great, so I'm just going to step aside here]

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    80. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Must be an illness the same way as any weird fetish.

      I prefer to think that gay men really like chicks, they just want their chicks to be hairy, grow a dick, optionally wear some muscle and facial hair, speak in low voice, have no tits and be in possession of Adam's apple down their neck. Optionally, some manly traits are preferred. So far, only men (but not all of them) comply with that fetish, but I think a girl with all these things would be exactly as appealing to them. We just have to breed them.

      Now, that would be natural. As it must be natural to be aroused by goats, sheep, cows, dogs, bedbugs and suchlike.

    81. Re:No objectionable material? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      I'm not friends with anyone who is gay

      How much you wanna bet?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    82. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're telling me that we should be happy that Apple deems it acceptable to ban porn apps because kids might see them - but considers app's like this to be OK for kids to see?!

      If anything is going to give a kid a distorted world view then it's shit like this.

    83. Re:No objectionable material? by Auroch · · Score: 1

      For all practical purposes (and considering that Einstein had to deal with society obsessed with religion), Einstein's mentioning of god at most counts as a metaphor for nature.

      That's an interesting interpretation of the words of a dead man. I wonder if we can find another group of people that disagree with you. Hmm. Now, if that other group is a group of scientists ... does that make science bad? Or does it make people prone to conflict, and the re-interpretation of the ideas of dead men a bad thing?

      Contrary to popular belief, not everything conforms to post-modernistic ideas.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    84. Re:No objectionable material? by Upphew · · Score: 1

      reproduction != sexuality

    85. Re:No objectionable material? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Color of eyes, hand preference, and skin color vary without difference in behavior or other negative effects.

      Blue-eyed people are more likely to be near-sighted.

      Left-handed people are more likely to have allergies, and are more likely to be mentally handicapped or above-average intelligence (the distribution curve is broader). They also tend to recover from strokes better.

      Light-skinned people are more susceptible to skin cancers.

      See any negatives in the above list?

      On the other hand, homosexuality = inability to reproduce. Because there is no natural way that two women or two women reproduce.

      Sure there is. Turkey baster + Internet. Or they can reproduce the same way anyone else does ...

    86. Re:No objectionable material? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      To expand on what you said, in fact, the current office of pastor is not one that is sanctioned by the Bible. The pastor's job is not to reach the lost or help the needy. The pastor's job is to equip the laypeople to reach the lost and help the needy. We have created our own political structure in the Church because we desire structure. We are repeating the same thing that happened back when Moses went up on the mountain. God was like "hey, I want to hang out with you guys down on Earth and get to know you." And the people were like "yeah, great, that will be awesome". So God came down on Mount Sinai and there was smoke and lighting and fire, and the people were like "Hey, God is scary. Moses, you go get familiar with him and then just give us the highlights."

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    87. Re:No objectionable material? by towermac · · Score: 1

      At most? Well, that's all it takes my friend. But I'll venture that the real question is whether there is any intelligence in "Nature".

      I'll spare you the diatribe, and just give you the answer, right here on Slashdot:

      "Nature" knows what love is. Thus the universe as we see it. So that love can exist in some tangible reality.

        A scientific guy like you can then easily work backwards from there.

    88. Re:No objectionable material? by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

      Sixty years ago your kind were saying the same thing about miscegenation, and with many of the same justifications.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    89. Re:No objectionable material? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Catholic priests don't reproduce, either. Should we wipe out the Catholic Church, too?

      If you want to write an app to attempt to convince catholic priests who want to buy the app to become non-priests, then more power to you.

      Refraining from sexual activity altogether is a bit different from unnatural sexuality.

      And catholic priests take a vow not to reproduce -- that's a personal choice, and does not mean they lack sexuality or are not driven to reproduce with the opposite sex.

      In fact... there is some question about how many of the Catholic priests are actually faithful to their promise. Obviously they cannot be married under the church, but it is still very possible for a Catholic priest to go to a bar one night, get drunk, and wake up in bed with a chick and a blank memory of the previous night.

      And there are more intentional affairs as well. Labelling Catholic priests as asexual would be at best disingenuous :)

    90. Re:No objectionable material? by jpyeck · · Score: 1

      There are more targeted organizations to give your money to than a church if your goal is to help the needy. United Way, Habitat for Humanity, Red Cross come to mind. When you give your money to a church, however, you lose control of the end goal of your money. Presumably, some fraction will go to administrative costs (pastors would fall under this category) in either case, but churches do not exist solely for charitable causes. Your money will in some measure be supporting the message and recruitment of the churches next generation. This is the same issue with having the government handle your charitable money... the organization in question has many goals and once they have your money, they can funnel it wherever they want. For me, it is important to separate the message (potentially something like this anti-gay application) from the charitable action.

    91. Re:No objectionable material? by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      iTunes U is not subject to the App Store rules. Apple have said that if you want to criticise a religion, don't submit to the App Store, but submit to one of their other stores, such as the iBookstore. They have different rules regarding each of their stores.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    92. Re:No objectionable material? by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      You're making an argument from a completely wrong set of premises.

      Catch up on 35 or so years of science:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_fertilization

    93. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nor is the app that encourages black people to be white considered racist.

    94. Re:No objectionable material? by centuren · · Score: 1

      In my town we have several so-called christian churches that tell families if they give money god will bless them. This of course is the heresy that prompted all protestant faiths.

      As opposed to the Catholic Church, which said that if you gave them money, your loved ones would be freed from Purgatory?

      Yes, except the opposite of "as opposed to".

    95. Re:No objectionable material? by centuren · · Score: 1

      I imagine a "cure for religion" app would be allowed, but someone go make it and find out.

      I'd be more interested to see an app that installs a button that, if pressed, pledges the user's support to the anti-christ after the second coming (or whatever the exact specifics for the unforgivable sin are, it's been a while since I've read the details).

      Debates pitting logic against god or arguing against god are one thing, but I wonder how people would respond to an app that, within the confines of "accepting" Christianity, commits the most horrendous act possible as outlined in the faith (in one click no less!).

    96. Re:No objectionable material? by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      But did they try to stop because they wanted to stop being gay or because of fear of the reaction of family and peers?

      I'm guessing (only guessing) that it's a mixture of societal/family pressures combined with internal confusion. For example, I suspect it would be hard for a guy raised/taught/imbued by family, friends, and society to stop and consider thoughts and feelings that he never had to personally confront head-on before.

      Have you ever wanted to stop being hetero?

      I've entertained the thoughts and seriously considered it before - there's no shame in saying it, and any man or woman who says he/she hasn't done so is a liar. I find it to be the hallmark of a mentally healthy, normal human being to at least consider it once or twice in his or her life, and a normal part of exploration during puberty, when a kid becomes a biological adult but doesn't quite know how to comprehend all the new desires and emotions.

      (I was fortunate to have been raised by parents who had explicitly stated that they would continue to love me either way. This left me perfectly free to do all of the decision-making for myself as a teenager).

      All that said, since it didn't quite elicit the same desires and reactions that thoughts of hetero sex and relationships do, I left the idea to die on its own, and I've never really had an occasion or desire to re-evaluate it. *shrug*.

      I daresay that a teenager who, in the midst of confusion during puberty, is pressured in any direction by parents/friends/etc? It does more harm than good, since IMHO that pressure will likely intensify the thoughts out of rebellion, among other reasons. There's also the existing interpersonal relationships that the kid may have at that time, which may intensify desires one way or the other. Most kids have an extremely hard time even identifying their emotions and desires, let alone articulate them (even to themselves), so I can see where a teenager might go either way at that point, as opposed to being "born" one way or the other.

      Most kids settle on it one way or the other by the time puberty ends, with each passing year reinforcing their identity. Some struggle with it for decades, or even their entire lives, until extreme old age makes the point moot. Some fall in-between (my wife's uncle is an example here - happily married for 20 years, woke up and settled the struggle, then left his wife and began searching for a man to fulfill him - awesome guy, highly intellectual, and a lot happier with himself nowadays. His ex-wife OTOH is still rather bitter about it, and it did a number on his kids).

      All that said, while I know where I fell in the spectrum, I still find it hard to articulate exactly how it would affect any given person, and the above was my best shot so far.

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    97. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other side of the coin, I have never seen organizations as caring, helpful and giving as religious organizations, such as Matthew 25 Ministries
      Check out what organizations provide help like food, shelter, support for the elderly and support for the mentally disabled to people in your own area. I bet the majority of them are Christian organizations.

      In any group, you will have people that range from assholes to genuinely caring. From my personal experience, I'd have to say that Christians skew more to the genuinely caring side.

    98. Re:No objectionable material? by AlamedaStone · · Score: 1

      In my town we have several so-called christian churches that tell families if they give money god will bless them. This of course is the heresy that prompted all protestant faiths.

      As opposed to the Catholic Church, which said that if you gave them money, your loved ones would be freed from Purgatory?

      I think the GP was already referring to the Catholic heresy which sparked the Protestant movement in the 1500s, and saying the "new" christian cash-for-salvation evangelists are no better - a point with which I cannot argue.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    99. Re:No objectionable material? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Homosexuality exists in nature. Deal with it.

      Just because something exists in nature does not mean it is natural.

      Animals kill each other in nature.

      That doesn't mean murdering another person and eating their flesh is natural.

    100. Re:No objectionable material? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      See any negatives in the above list?

      You're talking about statistical corelations. There is no evidence that having Blue eyes has anything to do with any of those.

      People who have allergies or nearsightedness would certainly like to have an app to fix them, though. Those definitely fall under the category of illness/disability/health problem, just like homosexuality does.

    101. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Homosexuality exists in nature. Deal with it.

      Just because something exists in nature does not mean it is natural.

      It does, actually. That's exactly what "natural" means. It also means "having a certain character by its inherent nature," which would mean the behavior follows inborn motivation instead of being imposed by the environment.

      Animals kill each other in nature.
      That doesn't mean murdering another person and eating their flesh is natural.

      Now you're talking about society and group morality and law, not nature.

      Put it this way: law and societal norms are forever in a struggle with human nature. If people weren't inclined to behave the way they do, such laws wouldn't be necessary. Fortunately for us, most people aren't inclined to kill and eat each other...but in some societies that was not the case, and cannibalism was both legal and moral. People in that society would probably argue that it was "completely natural."

    102. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless encouraging gay people not to be gay is like encouraging redheaded people not to be redheaded, which _would_ be ginger bashing.
      If you believe sexuality is an inherent trait, then yeah, it is gay bashing.

    103. Re:No objectionable material? by vell0cet · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that fanatical Christians make up a minority in US...

      But they sure are the loudest... and possibly have the most influence since they make up a large part of your government.

    104. Re:No objectionable material? by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Love is a bunch of chemicals and chemical signals in your head causing the neural network that is your brain to act in a specific way. In other words it doesn't exist except as an illusion caused by the design of your brain.

    105. Re:No objectionable material? by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      and the re-interpretation of the ideas of dead men a bad thing?

      If it's a bad thing then why did you do it yourself?

    106. Re:No objectionable material? by causality · · Score: 1

      A petition is not censorship. It is a request from customers to remove something very objectionable. Hate speech, in fact.

      Did you ever see me say that "a petition is censorship?" No? Good. That's because I never said that. This is a petition to enact censorship.

      Sorry but anytime I hear someone say "hate speech" I think, what a pansy. If anyone's speech bothers you for any reason or for no reason at all, my advice would be: don't listen to it. The world is insensitive. It is filled with people you won't like who say things you won't like. I for one believe in free speech. That includes the free speech of people who say things I really, really don't like and strongly disagree with.

      That includes the free speech of people I believe to be 100% wrong, misguided, ignorant, hateful, you name it. I am happy when they reveal the kind of person they are up-front. It makes it easy for me to decide not to associate with a hateful person. I like that better than wasting my time getting to know them only to realize they are great at putting on a front of phony inoffensiveness. I like that a hell of a lot better than trying to use market pressure, laws, manipulation, rules, or regulations to force people to conform to my idea of what a person should think about and talk about.

      The petition, and a boycott to follow, is simply the "free market" exerting its influence on corporate behavior. I can't imagine something that is a better example of free market behavior: get together and say you will not purchase a product until the company fixes something.

      You use the term "free market". I wonder if you actually understand what it means. A free market means that a willing seller does business with a willing buyer, and neither of them uses force or fraud. If a willing buyer cannot do business with a willing seller because you disapprove of the app being sold, this fails the definition of a free market. Now you're in a bit of a bind: either admit that you reject the notion of a free market or admit that your position is wrong because it is incompatible with it.

      Further, a free market would work thusly: if only a tiny minority of people ever purchase this app, then the producers of this app will make little or no profit from it. A free market also works thusly: if you don't like something, don't buy it, and let others have the same freedom to make that decision.

      Fact: no one is ever going to use this app unless they go out of their way to do so. You have to seek it out. This app is not going to tie you to a chair, peel your eyelids open, and force you to watch its messages. You will never see any of its content unless you make an active decision to subject yourself to it. Here's what you have such a problem with: the idea that a person would choose, of their own free will, to purchase and use this app.

      The effort to get it removed from the App Store is more than choosing not to buy it. It's an attempt to make sure no one else can buy it either. That's what removing it from the App Store accomplishes that choosing not to purchase it doesn't accomplish. See how simple that is? Deny that if you can. That's why this is censorship. That's the part you want to perform all kinds of mental gymnastics to avoid admitting, and that's too bad because it's the plain truth. I am trying to persuade you, but ultimately it is not my problem if you can't accept that.

      Part of being a mature adult involves accepting that other adults are going to watch, read, and listen to things you find offensive. They're going to practice religions you don't believe in. They'll listen to music you find distasteful. They'll read books written by authors you think are looney. You want to know one of the biggest reasons why the USA is no longer a free country? Because adults no longer have the maturity to live and let live.

      Lots of people want to control others, not because others

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    107. Re:No objectionable material? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Sorry but anytime I hear someone say "hate speech" I think, what a pansy.

      And every time I hear someone say "what a pansy" I think: "hate speech".

      Do you not believe that people should have the right to withhold money from companies that profit from products or methods that they find offensive?

      If I say, "Let's not buy Microsoft products until they stop with monopolistic practices" would that be OK?

      Then why not say, "Let's not buy Apple until they stop with giving a platform to homophobes"?

      It's not like there is any expectation of free speech at the app store, right? That's the whole purpose of a "walled garden" is that this is not a place where freedom of speech is enforced or even allowed. Apple can refuse any app for any reason. I would think "this will piss off one of my biggest customer segments" would be a good reason for them to drop this app. Censorship, the way you're using the term, is what happens when a government prevents speech. Apple is not the government.

      Why don't you believe in the free market?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    108. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that it's another thing enabling the gay-hating communities. Do you have any idea what it would be like to be a gay teenager growing up in one of these convert-teh-gays religions?

      "Gay conversion therapy" doesn't work - it's been proven time and time again. It's psychological torture. The social pressure put on gay people to convert in these communities is massive, and the harm is immeasurable. It leads to depression, and often, suicide (the suicide rate among gay teenagers is an order of magnitude higher than among straight teenagers). It leads to gay people marrying opposite-gendered straight people to 'prove' that they're straight now, which adds the misery to someone else as well (who is now going to be in a miserable sham-marriage with someone who doesn't love them - now the straight person gets to be depressed and suicidal as well, as their supposed life-long partner rejects them over a long period of time).

      Still think it's 'free speech'? It's not. It's long-term psychological torture by the people who matter most to you. It's abuse. It's NOT free speech.

    109. Re:No objectionable material? by colinrichardday · · Score: 1

      Oops, I believed that the original poster said that telling families to give money to the church in order to receive God's blessing was a basic Protestant tenet.

      <retraction voice="Litella">Never mind!</retraction>

    110. Re:No objectionable material? by dudeman500 · · Score: 1

      I'm sure all the people who were abused in the church's care would think the church can do a better job.

    111. Re:No objectionable material? by RoFLKOPTr · · Score: 1

      So you're telling me that we should be happy that Apple deems it acceptable to ban porn apps

      Where in my comment did I say that?

    112. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1
    113. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Huh? What does it matter what a couple people here and there think, when the vast majority of the church's leaders (no quotes, as they really are the leaders) agree with this exploitation, and the vast majority of its followers go along with it?

      As for Martin Luther, he was a big prick too: sure, he didn't like paying for indulgences, but he thought Jews should have their homes destroyed, their synagogues burned, money confiscated, and liberty curtailed. So much for one of the main "roots" of modern Christianity, and this idea that Christianity is supposed to be about love and forgiveness. The only one who ever preached that stuff was Jesus himself, and he was a Jew, not a Christian.

    114. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1
    115. Re:No objectionable material? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Don't get me started on the United Way. Their administrative costs are insanely high, and as you say applies to Churches, you completely lose control of the money you send. Although they say you can "earmark" your money, I don't want to give my money at all to an organization that uses part of their money to support causes that I am against. And further, United Way campaigns at workplaces are political disaster if you choose not to participate. Same with March of Dimes. It's like being forced to participate with your free time in an MLM.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    116. Re:No objectionable material? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd generally agree but in this case I'd argue that the problem is that the app store already engages in censorship. His Holy Steveness has already been known to censor certain things that other people might like such as porn because he takes a moral judgement that it's not acceptable for the app store.

      So by that Apple has already taken a moral stance with it's app store and has made the implication that it will filter out morally objectionable content and that hence, by extension, anything that is not morally objectionable must be, to Apple, morally acceptable.

      So the real problem is this- Apple either needs to remove the app stating it's equally as morally objectionable as porn, or it needs to state that it will not remove the app because it agrees that it's morally acceptable.

      In an open store where everything goes I'd agree completely with you- the company running that store would be making no moral judgement either way and would be remaining neutral. As Apple however has chosen to make a moral judgement in banning some apps, one can only take from that that if an app is rejected because Apple beleive's it's morally objectionable, then an app that is accepted is morally acceptable in the company's view.

      This is really why Apple was stupid to get into the censorship game in the first place approving/denying apps based on some arbitrary defintion of morals, because it was always going to run into a situation where it would have to make ever harder choices about what is and isn't moral. It may well be that you agree this app is morally acceptable, but in putting itself in this position Apple is isolating itself from it's userbase that is homosexual. Over time making these decisions will slowly erode support for your company. So again, sensible companies would take the neutral route of not making any moral judgements in the first place, at least, unless they're happy to accept the fallout that will inevitably arise.

    117. Re:No objectionable material? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I imagine a "cure for religion" app would be allowed, but someone go make it and find out.

      I think that would require physical surgery, to implant a new brain.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    118. Re:No objectionable material? by lilrobbie · · Score: 1

      Mmm... so in other words, the pastor should follow social customs for a culture that existed 2000 years ago... and pretend that this will allow them to survive?

      It is also interesting to note that Jesus' approach to this whole deal was not actually that radical. Society worked more in this regard than we do these days. Most people were not rich, and would be more likely to trade services than gold coins.

      Money is not a reward in and of itself. It is a means to live and exist in our current money-oriented society. So, a minister should not be focused on gaining economical wealth definitely, but it is also the job of the congregation and brethren of the faith to support the pastor in their ministering to the community. This means ensuring the minister can eat every now and then, and hopefully has a bed to sleep in. Unfortunately, the latter does not happen as much these days...

    119. Re:No objectionable material? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      That's true at your church, other churches have different responsibilities for a "pastor." What I was saying applies to anybody seeking to follow Jesus' teachings. Most so-called "Christians" don't even make an attempt; their goal is to follow what they were taught by some guy at some Church. And then they define it backwards, and try to ascribe whatever they were taught to Jesus.

      To non-Christians it's quite easy to simply read the things Jesus says in the New Testament, and understand his teachings. It looks very little like what I see at any Church, though I do meet a few individuals who practice it on their own.

    120. Re:No objectionable material? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      While I'd agree that most people identifying themselves as Christians are involved in the business of scamming, or being scammed, I don't think it's fair to say say that "Christianity is nothing but a way of scamming people for money." Jesus started the Christian movement, and martin Luther started the protestant branch of Christianity. They both did it specifically because they had a problem with that kind of exploitation. So it's not fair to say that's what it's about. But yes, you do see it being exploited for that purpose a lot. This is not a problem unique to Christianity, all charitable organizations and spiritual movements suffer from this kind of exploitation. The thing that's appalling is the blatant hypocrisy of church leaders in preaching a message that is so diametrically opposed to their actions (they even preach against hypocrisy for Christ's sake!). It's no wonder you see so much disillusionment among people who wish to be Christians.

    121. Re:No objectionable material? by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      It's no wonder you see so much disillusionment among people who wish to be Christians.

      Exactly. Jesus's message was pretty good, but all the church leaders after him have been a bunch of greedy hypocrites.

      Martin Luther was no saint, either: he was all in favor of treating Jews like crap and stealing their property, so even he didn't heed Jesus's teachings of non-judgmentalism.

    122. Re:No objectionable material? by PJ6 · · Score: 1

      So would a god bashing app be allowed?

      Yes, but not an Allah-bashing one. Because you know, that's different for some reason.

  3. There really is an app for everything :P by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 4, Funny

    Homosexual? There's an app for that!

    1. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by click2005 · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'd be interested to know how it works.

      My guess is.. If the on-iDevice microphone hears you mention Justin Bieber's ass it shows you a pair of tits?

      --
      I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
    2. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Gaygirlie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the on-iDevice microphone hears you mention Justin Bieber's ass it shows you a pair of tits?

      Showing tits to a homosexual man would not get any reaction, or maybe disgust. Ie. it wouldn't work.

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks. Atleast I know I can somehow just suddenly decide and stop being interested in other girls, no matter how hard I'd try. It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change.

      And doesn't the bible anyways tell one must not lie? Isn't it also a form of lying to know that you're homosexual deep inside but try to pose as a heterosexual person, both to yourself and possible partners and outside society? Ergo, wouldn't it be against the bible, too? It's something that has always bothered me. Then again, bible has lots of things that get contradicted by the very same book they're in..

    3. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just show Justin Bieber's ass? He's not exactly got classic good looks, I hardly think anyone would go gay for him. I prefer masculine men, feminine women... or whatever.

    4. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 3, Funny

      I would expect a question and answer system.

      Are you a:

      1. Man?
      2. Woman?

      Tonight do you plan to:

      1. Have sex with a man?
      2. Have sex with a woman?
      3. Watch TBN?

      If 1 & 1 or 2 & 2:

      You do realize that if you do that you are going to hell, right?

      If 1 & 2 or 2 & 1:

      You make baby Jesus cry.

      If 1 & 3 or 2 & 3:

      Be sure to buy our merchandise!

    5. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by gmhowell · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change.

      Dear God, you're gay.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    6. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 4, Informative

      From the website it just seems like an app that shows the organization's events and explains their points of view. You may not like their points of view but it's pretty harmless. And given the rating it received it's highly unlikely it discusses sexuality at all.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    7. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If the on-iDevice microphone hears you mention Justin Bieber's ass it shows you a pair of tits?

      Is there a difference?

    8. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by realityimpaired · · Score: 3, Interesting

      the Bible also has nothing against lesbians, only gay males... actually, some of the ways of reading the book of Ruth, she can be interpreted as a lesbian.... :) Personally... I made an arrangement with the Bible decades ago: I don't bother it, and it doesn't bother me. My girlfriend has different issues with it, but that's because her father is a pastor. (personally, I think that the xian God is petty, vindictive, and cliquish, and certainly not the kind of deity I'd want to break bread with)

      More on topic... the lying/bible thing... have you ever seen the movie For The Bible Tells Me So? They address the issue of these so-called "straight camps" in a pretty blunt way: it puts a kind of social negative pressure on people who are gay, discouraging them from accepting themselves, and teaching them to be ashamed of their natural feelings. That lack of self-acceptance is one of the leading causes of suicide within the LGBT community, at least in my experience. I have to ask how many gay boys and girls killed themselves without ever coming out, because they were afraid of being accepted... I have a girlfriend who's in the middle of exactly that debate with herself right now, because her parents are vehemently religious, and she's trans. I'm really worried for how it's going to turn out for her, and I sincerely hope she can get the hell out of her parents' house and into a safe place soon.

      (and I tried to be straight. once. when I was 14. I got sick. literally. threw up. and didn't date anybody again until university... and yet still when I told my mom I was queer, she replied "no you're not"... I was lucky, though.... both my parents have happily accepted me once they saw the difference that not lying about myself made to my general sense of well-being and happiness).

    9. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by oliverthered · · Score: 2

      " It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change."

      I know people who didn't swing the other way until way into their 40s... you'd be surprised sexuality can change, though usually in the direction of bi-sexual and finding it unbearable to live with the other sex.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    10. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You probably cannot eliminate the urges, but if one actually wants to, and tries, they can repress those urges. It is similar to, an albeit much simpler impulse, to see some kind of food that looks tasty, but realize that you don't need it and it is better that you don't eat it. The impulse is there, but you can control the impulse, but again, only if you want to.
      Second, I don't see how not expressing your inner desires makes you a liar. If someone is OCD, does trying not to let it control them make them a liar?
      Lastly, I suspect this app is for people who have homosexual desires but want to control them for whatever reason. If someone happy as a homosexual and living that way, they don't have to use it.

    11. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      If the on-iDevice microphone hears you mention Justin Bieber's ass it shows you a pair of tits?

      Showing tits to a homosexual man would not get any reaction, or maybe disgust. Ie. it wouldn't work.

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks. Atleast I know I can somehow just suddenly decide and stop being interested in other girls, no matter how hard I'd try. It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change.

      And doesn't the bible anyways tell one must not lie? Isn't it also a form of lying to know that you're homosexual deep inside but try to pose as a heterosexual person, both to yourself and possible partners and outside society? Ergo, wouldn't it be against the bible, too? It's something that has always bothered me. Then again, bible has lots of things that get contradicted by the very same book they're in..

      Wow, I have mod-points and was going to mod your comment, but I couldn't find a "+1 I love you, that was awesome!" moderation option. :-) I went one step farther than just signing the petition, I send the iTunes/App Store a rather long email telling them how disgusted and appalled I am at their decision. I also asked if they wished to be associated with the type of damage that Exodus International has caused in numerous people's lives. I hope they take the email seriously - regardless, I was looking for what response I get from them, since they promise a response to such support emails (and especially since they haven't made any other public statements about this).

    12. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps their sexuality didn't change (it was always there, just being repressed). Far more likely that they simply came to a place where they felt able or willing to explore their "other" side.

      Behavior doesn't dictate sexual orientation. Many a gay man of the past got married and had kids. Didn't make him straight, just closeted. And when he "came out", it didn't mean he "turned gay", just that he stopped lying about who he really was.

    13. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bible doesn't quite contradict itself in terms of its viewpoints on homosexuality. Other quite obvious contradictions aside, the bible quite plainly states that homosexuals must be put to death, as what they perpetrated upon the world is an abomination in the eyes of God.

      Relevant: http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/70-year-old-stoned-to-death-because-the-bible-says-to-stone-gays/news/2011/03/18/18138/

      As a disclaimer, I think the abomination lies in any "holy book" that calls for the murder of non-adherents...

    14. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally I dislike gay males because they are just so fabulous and dress like I can only imagine. Thus making all of us straights look like slobs.

      That was sarcasm in case you can't tell.

    15. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by narcc · · Score: 5, Funny

      I guess her username " Gaygirlie" wasn't a big enough clue?

    16. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Kral_Blbec · · Score: 0, Troll

      By that reasoning it is perfectly acceptable to be a pedophile, murderer, rapist, alcoholic, or any other sort of degenerate just because it is who you are deep inside. There is a difference between admitting attraction and acting on it, just as we expect the psychopath not to eat people even though he wants to.
      And no, I'm not equating homosexuality with canabalism, just pointing out that everyone is born with certain tendencies or urges, that those tendencies are encouraged or repressed depending on many environmental and personal variables, and that certain tendencies should always be fought against, even if it is what you are "deep inside."
      The "I can't help it" excuse is no more valid for homosexuality than for alcoholism. There are plenty of people for both issues who admit problems and consciously struggle against it.

    17. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by supersloshy · · Score: 0

      And doesn't the bible anyways tell one must not lie? Isn't it also a form of lying to know that you're homosexual deep inside but try to pose as a heterosexual person, both to yourself and possible partners and outside society? Ergo, wouldn't it be against the bible, too? It's something that has always bothered me. Then again, bible has lots of things that get contradicted by the very same book they're in..

      The Bible isn't meant to be the sole rule of faith. Also, you're taking that out of context. Yes it's wrong to lie, and yes it's wrong to lie about not being a homosexual. However, that doesn't make homosexuality okay. It perverts the entire point of there being a difference between man and woman in the first place (plus sticking a reproductive organ into a digestive tract is just disgusting for so many reasons).

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    18. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did/does homosexuality evolve?

    19. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by hldn · · Score: 1

      fuck you.

      --
      http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    20. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      From the website it just seems like an app that shows the organization's events and explains their points of view. You may not like their points of view but it's pretty harmless. And given the rating it received it's highly unlikely it discusses sexuality at all.

      So, there's no need for such an app, since on all these iDevices, people can get that info right from their website? In addition, regardless of it being an app that just does that, would YOU want to support an organization/cult that has harmed so many people? Dig deep and research them. I for one, regardless of what their app does, would be vehemently against doing anything supportive.

      YMMV... but I think it this was an app from an organization for black people to teach them the error of their ways (as per the Bible) and that they should be subserviant to their white masters, or to teach women that they are their husband's sex slaves and subserviant (as per the Bible), do you think Apple should allow those apps? This is much the same. All three of those hateful, sick, disturbing things are in the Bible, (condoned - "and even ordered by God" - slavery, and women being 2nd rate citizens who must submit to their husbands whenever their husband demands). There are religious groups in this country who still believe those two - just as Exodus has it's sick beliefs. But... you don't see Apple (or any sane person) supporting enslaving black people, Mexicans or Canadians... just as you don't see Apple or any sane person supporting the sick scenarios against women. Think about it... if one of those radical groups made an events app, do you think Apple would allow it?

      So, again, why should Apple allow Exodus to sell/give away an app on the App Store - even if it is only an app that lists the events of Exodus' sick twisted actions?

    21. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tverbeek · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you cross-examine any of the "success" stories that Exodus International produces, you'll find that they haven't lost the "temptation" (i.e. homosexual attraction), they've only learned not to act on it, and maybe they now go through the motions of heterosexual intercourse without really enjoying it much. Which is very much like "curing" left-handedness by training someone not to use their left hand, to the point that they can write legibly (but clumsily) with their right hand.

      And those are the "successes". Interview the countless ex-ex-gays who've "relapsed" after their Exodus conditioning fails (which is most of them), and you'll find that nearly all of these "straight" men were thinking of men during intercourse/masturbation, and most were sneaking off for anonymous bathroom and rest-area sex all along. The "cure" actually produces worse behavior than the "disease".

      It takes a massive dose of wishful thinking and denial of reality for anyone (in the program or not) to believe that any "gay cure" program actually does what it says in the trifold brochure.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    22. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      And then they lead miserable lives as a result because the addiction is always with them. Then again I suppose Christians are all about being miserable and repressed no matter what the situation at hand. What can one expect from people who are taught to believe sex is disgusting.

      Also, you are aware that the first step in fighting an addiction is "admit you have a problem" right? Burying your head in the sand is counterproductive.

    23. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Harmless? How is fostering and perpetuating anti-gay bigotry and hate "harmless"? How is spreading lies and misinformation "harmless"? How is teaching people to hate who they are and forcing them to pretend to be what they're not "harmless"?

      There are many dead people, who committed suicide, thanks to the works of Exodus. Even the founder of Exodus eventually came out and denounces the organization he started. It's hardly "harmless". It's deeply harmful.

    24. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      umm.... The Gay men I know have shagged more straight men than Gay men... Same goes for Gay women. I did think about shagging my mate once, he looked like he needed a good shag, but we'll he ain't Gay so I'm not the man for the Job.

      Funny enough... not all Women turn me on, and I don't think that all straight women in the street want to rape me.

      I usually go for personality and trust over everything else in a partner... sex for fun.. looks to impress others. Blokes personalities just generally don't gel to well with me.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    25. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Very good question. But it's downright naive to think that it's unique to humans... it isn't. It's been observed in just about every species in nature that has pair bonding. I have no idea what the evolutionary advantage of it is, or if there is an evolutionary advantage at all (beyond population control), but it's surprisingly common in nature.

    26. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by badboy_tw2002 · · Score: 2

      Why does one need an "excuse" for homosexual acts between consenting adults. That would imply that you find what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their home as wrong, which is quite obviously idiotic.

    27. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Homosexual? There's an app for that!

      Metrosexual? There's Apple for that!

      FTFY

    28. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      By that reasoning it is perfectly acceptable to be a pedophile, murderer, rapist, alcoholic, or any other sort of degenerate just because it is who you are deep inside.

      'Acceptable' is subjective.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    29. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by russotto · · Score: 1

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks.

      Simple conditioning can "cure" someone from liking steaks. Put something in the steaks which causes them to become violently ill after eating it, pretty soon he'll find steaks disgusting.

      You could probably condition someone out of their sexuality that way, but not in any ethical way, and the side effects would likely be pretty bad. I can't see how you could condition someone IN to a sexuality, although maybe you could come up with a regimen involving direct stimulation of the pleasure center.

    30. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      The Bible doesn't say you can't be a homosexual, or that you should hide or lie about being homosexual, it just says that you shouldn't have sex with a person of the same gender.

      Being a homosexual and having sex with someone of the same gender are not the same thing. One is a preference, attraction, or fascination, the other is an action.

      There are a lot of apparent contractions, but it's totally dependent on your knowledge of the text and your interpretation. Taking things out of context and interpreting them in a way that supports your view that the Bible has contradictions will produce contradictions. The opposite is also true.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    31. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks.

      Actually, saying it's possible to 'cure gay' is just like saying you can 'cure straight'

      Basically anyone who truly believes you can 'cure gay' is effectively saying that with enough force and convincing, not only could they turn from straight to gay, but be happy with the results.

      It says a lot more about the person making the statement than it does about reality.

    32. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by mean+pun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The "I can't help it" excuse is no more valid for homosexuality than for alcoholism. There are plenty of people for both issues who admit problems and consciously struggle against it.

      But there is no rational reason to consider homosexuality as a problem, whereas there are plenty of good reasons to consider alcoholism, violence, and some forms of pedophilia as a problem. Homosexuality doesn't harm anybody, while the others actively harm the person itself and/or other people. For the same reason bigotry is also a problem, but unfortunately very few people admit the problem and consciously struggle against it.

    33. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1, Informative

      the Bible also has nothing against lesbians, only gay males...

      Paul disagrees in Romans:

      1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature : 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection , implacable, unmerciful: 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death , not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

      Religion is evil.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    34. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 3, Informative

      So, there's no need for such an app, since on all these iDevices, people can get that info right from their website? In addition, regardless of it being an app that just does that, would YOU want to support an organization/cult that has harmed so many people? Dig deep and research them. I for one, regardless of what their app does, would be vehemently against doing anything supportive.

      Correct, I've since downloaded the app and it's just a front-end to their website, all it does is download the same pages and display them in the app. It's made with a lame automatic app creation tool to make cookie cutter apps. Shouldn't be in the AppStore in the first place. I guess they were counting on the Streisand Effect from some cheap publicity.

      I don't support anything about this group. I once read an article about a guy that went under cover in one of those "gay cure" places they have and it seriously disturbed me. That said everybody has rights, even bigots. It's up to us sane ones to make sure there are rules that protect everyone, not to join the patients in the asylum.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    35. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      the Bible also has nothing against lesbians, only gay males...

      I know, though atleast here many churches and religious fanatics also preach that lesbianity is equally bad and sinful. Ie. even people believing in the same religion don't know what really is right and what is wrong. Yet they still feel they have the right to shove their views on others whether they want it or not.

      I have a girlfriend who's in the middle of exactly that debate with herself right now, because her parents are vehemently religious, and she's trans. I'm really worried for how it's going to turn out for her, and I sincerely hope she can get the hell out of her parents' house and into a safe place soon.

      This is probably the wrong place to discuss this as there are bound to come some nasty remarks later on, but I just thought to mention that I can understand what she's going through. I have two friends who happen to be FtM transsexuals and one of them happens to be from a very religious family so I have seen quite a lot and been there all the way from the start. Hopefully your girlfriend has the strength to go through the whole process and be herself.

    36. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by hedwards · · Score: 1

      It doesn't change, you'd be surprised how far repression can get you. Until I realized that I might not be straight I had no idea that I wasn't. Then within about 10 minutes a lot of my life started to make sense. Anybody who is in their 40s and claims to suddenly be gay is either lying or was massively repressed previously.

      Sexual orientation does not change to that extent over time. Even fetishes which are known to not be innate are borderline impossible to extinguish once one has one, and sometimes expand to related interests as time goes by.

    37. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      " It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change."

      I know people who didn't swing the other way until way into their 40s... you'd be surprised sexuality can change, though usually in the direction of bi-sexual and finding it unbearable to live with the other sex.

      It could happen, I am not claiming otherwise, I am however saying that you can _force_ the change. If it comes with time then it comes with time, but there isn't really anything you can do to force it one way or the other. At most you can encourage suppressed tastes, but even then the result will not be guaranteed and it'll likely swing from side to side for a while before settling down.

    38. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Looking at Bieber's ass gets you plenty of dates in prison. Looking at a pair of tits hardly results in more sex.

    39. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      You probably cannot eliminate the urges, but if one actually wants to, and tries, they can repress those urges. It is similar to, an albeit much simpler impulse, to see some kind of food that looks tasty, but realize that you don't need it and it is better that you don't eat it. The impulse is there, but you can control the impulse, but again, only if you want to.
      Second, I don't see how not expressing your inner desires makes you a liar. If someone is OCD, does trying not to let it control them make them a liar?

      Trying to pose to your companion and outer society as anything you aren't is akin to lying, so yeah, I do agree that it also applies to the actually horrible human traits like murderous tendencies or paedophilia.

    40. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      The Bible isn't meant to be the sole rule of faith

      Yet it is posed as such. Especially when something is questioned you get the response: "It says so in the bible and because bible is always true then it is so."

      (plus sticking a reproductive organ into a digestive tract is just disgusting for so many reasons).

      Really? I quite happen to enjoy being on the receiving side.

    41. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Therilith · · Score: 1

      It doesn't change. Anybody who is in their 40s and claims to suddenly be gay is either lying or was massively repressed previously. Sexual orientation does not change to that extent over time.

      [Citation Needed]

    42. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      I've had a gender identity complex for years.. I've always described myself as well never fancying a bloke (I could fuck one good, I just couldn't live with one... which sounds a bit like most of the Lesbians I've hung around with), all my close friends have always been female though I do have the odd male friend.

      sometimes it's a 'wrong bits' or 'I don't have one of those I wouldn't know what to do with it' thing.... but those things could turn into fetishes.

      I think sexuality is more malleable than you'd think... well within a reasonable sized group of people.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    43. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      There are a lot of apparent contractions

      Indeed, there are usually LOTS of contractions when men have sex..... ;)

    44. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      I have a girlfriend who's in the middle of exactly that debate with herself right now, because her parents are vehemently religious, and she's trans. I'm really worried for how it's going to turn out for her, and I sincerely hope she can get the hell out of her parents' house and into a safe place soon.

      Unfortunately, that's probably what it's going to take. Sometimes a bit of space and time can make a difference, but usually not. Friends are usually more accepting because, let's face it, you can pick your friends, but you're stuck with family.

    45. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      This is probably the wrong place to discuss this as there are bound to come some nasty remarks later on, but I just thought to mention that I can understand what she's going through. I have two friends who happen to be FtM transsexuals and one of them happens to be from a very religious family so I have seen quite a lot and been there all the way from the start. Hopefully your girlfriend has the strength to go through the whole process and be herself.

      *nods* there's only so much I can do at a distance... She's about 3000 miles away from here... I've pulled in some contacts, and gotten her in touch with some mutual friends in the area, but that's all I can do for her right now. (met through World of Warcraft actually... shortly before I cancelled my account, lol). All I can do now is hope, and try to poke and prod. She got into a very deep hole... dropped out of high school, is 26 now and only just going back for a GED, but basically withdrew into herself and has virtually no friends now. :( le sigh. As if being trans didn't suck enough for her. (and as an aside, glad you're a trans ally... there's way too many people within the LGBT community who don't accept transsexuals, and it really does bug me... probably half of my best friends are trans. it really does hurt to see how people treat them)

    46. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And doesn't the bible anyways tell one must not lie? Isn't it also a form of lying to know that you're homosexual deep inside but try to pose as a heterosexual person, both to yourself and possible partners and outside society? Ergo, wouldn't it be against the bible, too? It's something that has always bothered me. Then again, bible has lots of things that get contradicted by the very same book they're in..

      Yes, the Bible says you should not lie. But at this point you may as well lie, and every other sin if you are going to continue to live the sinful homosexual lifestyle. The Bible also says "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." (James 2:10). So continuing in sin, no matter which one makes you guilty of all of them. Dont get me wrong, there is no way to completely remove all sin from your life. But willingly engaging in sin shows you have no saving faith. We are only saved by faith that Christ paid the price for our sins and that we through faith in his vicarious satisfaction covers our unrighteousness. But willfull sin we dash that faith to the ground. Its like a dog returning to its vomit.
      Secondly, the bible never contradicts itself. We as sinful humans look for ways to discount the Bible to make us feel better. Perhaps there are bad translations that appear to be contradictions if someone is looking for them, kind of like a problem in search of a solution. But the Konie greek in every case I have ever looked into has made the fact that there are no contradictions in the Bible very clear.

    47. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      I sit corrected... though I would say that my affection for my girlfriend feels pretty darned natural.... her reactions to that affection are definitely natural ^.~

    48. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 0

      Why would anyone want to "repress those urges" if nobody's getting hurt by expressing them?

      It's funny how some people think that two men or two women in a same-sex marriage somehow affects the validity of their marriage. Or how it's their god-appointed duty to make everyone into their own image of what a "god-fearing person" is.

      The people pushing such "cures" have issues with their own sexuality.

    49. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      And doesn't the bible anyways tell one must not lie? Isn't it also a form of lying to know that you're homosexual deep inside but try to pose as a heterosexual person, both to yourself and possible partners and outside society? Ergo, wouldn't it be against the bible, too? It's something that has always bothered me. Then again, bible has lots of things that get contradicted by the very same book they're in..

      The argument is that every person has urges and that some urges are sinful and should not be indulged. Those urges include stuff like masturbation, sex outside of matrimony and homosexual leanings. Those are all seen as temptations that exist because of the degenerate nature of man after the fall from grace. So ignoring those urges and posing as a hetero is actually seen as a very positive thing: ignoring the devil if you will and choosing to live like god ordered it despite your nature.

      Of course it's all bullshit.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    50. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An app for that? Yup, a few. They are dating apps!

    51. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Depends on the family. I know people who've been completely disowned by their parents (and I think the friend in particular is going to become one of those, I just hope she's strong enough to take it), but I also know people whose parents, once they got over the initial shock, have become completely supportive and proud.

      But yeah, I do know where you're coming from. Before I was ready to come out, I was careful to pick my friends and make sure they were all allies. When I finally did come out, the reactions varied along the lines of "that explains a lot" and "took you long enough" and "yeah, so?"... my parents were surprised (and blissfully ignorant), but none of my friends were. :)

    52. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 1

      You're fine, its the religion that's fucked up.

      I think Paul actually liked the cock, just like Ted Haggard. Which explains why he was such misogynistic asshole.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    53. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Black? There's an app for that!

    54. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Showing tits to a homosexual man would not get any reaction, or maybe disgust. Ie. it wouldn't work.

      I just asked a flaming gay friend if he liked boobs. He does indeed. He doesn't want to motorboat them, but really enjoys a good glimpse at a nice rack. Which confirms what I have always thought, love of boobs is universal. You are wrong.

    55. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      umm.... The Gay men I know have shagged more straight men than Gay men...

      It's not gay unless balls are touching.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    56. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      I'd say it's not Gay until you adopt.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    57. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no "rational" reason to consider prostitution wrong; isn't it by two consenting adults? You're trying to apply modern logic and beliefs on a biblical stance (homosexuality) that's been around for thousands of years. It's your call if you choose to believe in God and the Bible but to make a subjective declaration in rebellion to what's been written for 2000 years is a bit foolhardy.

    58. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I guess her username " Gaygirlie" wasn't a big enough clue?

      I guess I was too subtle? /me looks at 'troll' mod on my comment. Yep. Too subtle.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    59. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you're going to quote Romans at least put it in context. Paul says that the wages of sin is death. In other words, no one who has sinned can ever be worthy of a perfectly just god. That's the entire reason for sacrificial atonement in the old testament. That's the entire reason Jesus was sent to earth to die, so that the law of the old testament could be fulfilled once and for all. Paul is listing out sins in those verses. Let me list a few others: lying, sloth, lust, anger. God doesn't see any of these as any worse than another. Each and every one carries a sentence of death. But Jesus was crucified as the perfect sacrifice. Perfect in life, he is the only one who doesn't deserve to die for his sins. Since he was killed as a sacrifice for us, we can be forgiven for our sins and are no longer sentenced to death. This is hardly a call to kill people who sin.

      There are some other verses you should consider (oddly enough, also from Romans) "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord." Romans 12:19, NIV

      If you want to bash Christianity, it's your right, but you should at least learn what mainstream Christian's believe (hint: the majority of /.ers seem to have a very poor caricature of Christianity in their heads, and seldom if ever actually know what Christians are saying or doing)

    60. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    61. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      Well, if it helps her you can tell her she can talk to me about these things and how she feels. I know I am a complete stranger, but sometimes it's even easier to talk to someone you know you'll never meet face to face and who you don't know in any way or form. Atleast I've been around these circles for several years, with transsexual friends and all that, and I am almost the same age too.

      So, I dunno, it's up to her if she just wants to open up to some random person on the Internet, I'm just offering a hand here. My e-mail should be visible in my profile.

    62. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      digestive tract? well, sorry to break it to you, but oral sex is now probably more acceptable than vaginal intercourse among heteros...

      score +1 for the liberal conspiracy!

    63. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      Showing tits to a homosexual man would not get any reaction, or maybe disgust. Ie. it wouldn't work.

      ... so if you show a penis to a man and he's not disgusted, is he gay? What if he finds it an attractive penis, but does not want it in him? Does that make him gay too? You can't turn the argument into "either/or". See, if you claim that if showing a penis to a lesbian is a turn off, and showing boobs to a gay man is a turn off ... then you're implying that showing a penis to a straight man would also turn him off, and that boobs to a woman would turn her off. Your argument, that sexuality is all or nothing (pro or anti boob, no middle ground) isn't actually how sexuality is viewed by the scientific community. What I'm saying is that Sexuality doesn't work that way.

      Now, It's obvious you havn't actually studied the bible considering the anti-bible stance you're taking, but it's also obvious you're not up to date on the sex/gender preference research done back in the 40-50s by kinsey.

      If you're going to come out for a certain viewpoint (or against another) ... have the courtesy to be well informed with at least ONE of the sides.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    64. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      If teh gay affects their life and they want to change it, who the hell are you to tell them they can't?

      If they're being pressured by outside parties, of course, it is a different story, but I find it kind of hypocritical of the lgbTqa that they support men who want to be women, but not gay men that honestly want to be straight.

      Food for thought.

      We live in a free society, so let people be free, even when they disagree with you.

    65. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality.

      Why couldn't one be 'cured' from this type of mental ailment? Isn't that the point of certain categories of pseudo-doctors? Why is this any different than other medical self help apps/sites?

    66. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would anyone want to "repress those urges" if nobody's getting hurt by expressing them?

      Regarding physical health, there is increasing evidence that mortality and morbidity rates are substantially higher for those who engage in homosexual practices. For example, the risk of anal cancer soars by as much as 4,000% for men who engage in anal intercourse with other men. The host of medical consequences of those who practice anal intercourse is large, from the tearing of the rectal lining with all of its accompanying problems to the diseases associated with subsequent contact with fecal matter. http://www.narth.com/docs/risks.html

      Perhaps people are concerned about the public health burden? Or even care enough to try to help stop self-destructive behavior? Just spitballing here....

    67. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by pipelayerification · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I've met a few vegetarians that thought I could be cured of liking steaks if only I tried a little harder.

    68. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by artor3 · · Score: 2

      Playing devil's advocate here... I am completely in favor of gay rights.

      But how about incest? If two relatives are attracted to each other, and wish to adopt a child, what harm is there to society? None. And yet it's taboo. People with such feelings very much need to control them, and should probably seek counseling to get "fixed".

      Likewise, homosexuality (until recently) was taboo, and very much against our culture. People were taught that they need to control their feelings, and that they should seek counseling to get "fixed".

      Now on the other hand, consider alcohol use, or smoking. Definite negative impact on society, with only minor benefits. Yet because they've been culturally accepted for so long, no one thinks that a person needs fixing just because they aren't a teetotaler.

      My point is that what we allow and what we disallow has very little to do with effect on society, and more to do with how our culture views those things. Right now, we're undergoing a cultural shift from puritan values to more pragmatic ones, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the new values are better.

      As a thought experiment, imagine that tomorrow scientists discover that homosexuality is caused by a chemical imbalance in the brain, and start producing a "straight pill". Our modern sensibilities might rebel at the thought, but think about it. Balding men take pills to keep their hair, flat-chested women go through surgery to get bigger breasts, depressed people take pills to feel better, stressed people take pills to sleep, damn near everyone takes caffeine to get through the day. If a gay person wants to be "fixed" and can do so easily, why shouldn't they? Just because it goes against your values?

      This app is an attempt at that pill. It almost certainly doesn't work, and deserves as much derision as snake oil diet pills. But unless people are being forced to use it, there's nothing immoral going on here.

    69. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      the Bible also has nothing against lesbians, only gay males...

      Paul disagrees in Romans:

      1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature : 1:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 1:30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 1:31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection , implacable, unmerciful: 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death , not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

      Religion is evil.

      Taking things out of context is evil.

      Interpreting the words of a 2000 year old second hand manuscript that is no longer intact, a part of a book that has been translated and retranslated several times, and using that interpretation out of context to condemn, criticize and over-generalize a group of people that have been lumped together in an over-generalized concept is evil.

      Religion is just misunderstood. Then misapplied. Then unfairly criticized, and suddenly a bunch of people are being burnt at a stake, while crosses burn and women are enslaved. Or wait, that might be politics.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    70. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      *nods* there's only so much I can do at a distance... She's about 3000 miles away from here... I've pulled in some contacts, and gotten her in touch with some mutual friends in the area, but that's all I can do for her right now. (met through World of Warcraft actually... shortly before I cancelled my account, lol).

      Wow. A MtF trans girlfriend you met on WoW that lives 3000 miles away. I'd like to say "What a surprise", but the real surprise isn't in the details.

      But seriously. Good luck with that.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    71. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      Perhaps their sexuality didn't change (it was always there, just being repressed). Far more likely that they simply came to a place where they felt able or willing to explore their "other" side.

      Behavior doesn't dictate sexual orientation. Many a gay man of the past got married and had kids. Didn't make him straight, just closeted. And when he "came out", it didn't mean he "turned gay", just that he stopped lying about who he really was.

      Or ... maybe you can have both situations? It doesn't have to be one or the other. Some people might "turn" gay later in life, some people might live life in the closet. Can't we all just get along?

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    72. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by mallyn · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Lets have an app to build your own bible.

      The bible we have now is the result of an app developed by a startup in Rome in about 300 AD.

      That startup got venture funding from Emperor Constantine's capital funds firm

      Constantine funding of the Bible app was a strategic investment. It was not for profit, but for consolidation of power.

      You see, religion at this time was like a bunch of little computers that were not interconnected. They each had their own autonimous power and rule.

      Constantine knew that if he created a single mainframe religion, he can exert power over the people because their bunch of little computers would no longer be relevant.

      Of course, slashdot was not invented at that time, therefore there was no story

      Now, with our internet and bunch of interconnected little computers, the mainframe is no longer relevant. It's pieces are now found on Ebay and many ham radio flea markets.

      Luv and Peace

      --
      Most Respectfully Yours Mark Allyn Bellingham, Washington
    73. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Kohath · · Score: 1

      But there is no rational reason to consider homosexuality as a problem...

      What if a guy wants to have a wife and children? It seems like homosexuality would be a problem in that case. It might, at least, make things more challenging.

      Men have been known to want a wife and children.

    74. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      I have science for you, and it does quite the opposite of population control.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    75. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      It doesn't change, you'd be surprised how far repression can get you. Until I realized that I might not be straight I had no idea that I wasn't.

      I feel your pain. I've spent my life thinking I was gay. People teased me, I was laughed at a lot, and life was very difficult. Then I realized it wasn't homosexuality I was struggling with after all... just GAY-NESS.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    76. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      You probably cannot eliminate the urges, but if one actually wants to, and tries, they can repress those urges. It is similar to, an albeit much simpler impulse, to see some kind of food that looks tasty, but realize that you don't need it and it is better that you don't eat it. The impulse is there, but you can control the impulse, but again, only if you want to.

      What a terrible example. It sounds like a defense of pedophilia. If someone can be gay but closeted, the gay community says "come out! You're still gay!", but if someone is a closeted pedophile... well, did you want them to come out too?

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    77. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by epyT-R · · Score: 0

      Atleast I know I can somehow just suddenly decide and stop being interested in other girls, no matter how hard I'd try.

      I'm sure the insecure feminists, monogamist religious, as well as many LGBT types would LOVE to figure out how to do this.. hetero male sex drive is blamed as the first cause for all the 'problems' related to gender issues by these groups.

    78. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      I also asked if they wished to be associated with the type of damage that Exodus International has caused in numerous people's lives.

      If only you knew how much damage the republican party has caused me, personally. And I'm not even american! Can I request that the USA come up with some sort of solution to finally stop them from ruining the financial sector of my country? I'm telling you, they're not even part of my country!

      Oh, and can we thank Mike Godwin, for making every slashdot post redundant?

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    79. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      On hot-button topics, subtlety is lost.

      Dear God, you're gay.

      ... gets you a troll mod.

      Dear God, you're gay :-)

      ... doesn't.

      (I know, emoticons are more of a "chick thing" Emotional Expression Online: Gender Differences In Emoticon Use)

    80. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      whoops.. missed your username.. my bad. still, though, I think my point is valid.

    81. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      Hey man, what's wrong with cannibalism? It's a legitimate life choice. It's not like I'm KILLING people - they're already dead! What, your social rules are prudish and outdated, and have cause a lot of death (from starvation). In fact, cannibalism has enjoyed an underground movement ever since the victorian era, prior to which it was accepted (if not condoned) - because people accepted it as a fact of life! We need to update our social thinking and open our minds, brother!

      Can we have a million man pride parade? Our tag line could be : I bet you can't eat just one, because you'll never go back!

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    82. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 2

      Then again I suppose Christians are all about being miserable and repressed no matter what the situation at hand.

      Actually, I thought that was atheists - always running around, unsatisfied with their life and trying to convince others of their views ... rather than just letting us live in peace.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    83. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality.

      The rationale is born from a combination of ignorance and discomfort of being around people that are different.,

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    84. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by chucklebutte · · Score: 0

      MOAR TRANNY LOVE!

    85. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really enjoy cheesecake...

      Seriously, who can't love cheesecake? Those who disagree probably really do enjoy it and are just denying themselves.

      However, if I were in a room filled with cheesecake and forced to eat every piece I would soon fall out of favor with my beloved food.

      I think you get where I'm going with this...

    86. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

      FYI: St. Thomas Aquinas felt that that passage was about women having non-vaginal intercourse.

      And any way, you might notice that even the homosexuality among men (and among women, if you disagree with Aquinas) is listed as an *effect* of God's wrath, not a cause. And lastly, this is the one prominent person in the NT who never personally knew Jesus who's talking anyway. Jesus, the guy who told the parable of the Good Samaritan, who hung out with prostitutes, tax collectors, and other social outcasts, who said judge not lest ye be judged, the guy that "whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life" (notice the lack of conditions there).

      "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. " -- Galatians 3:28.

      --
      Man on crucifix terrorizes church, demands they eat his flesh and blood. Details at 11.
    87. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's where your decadence has gotten you:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-3X5hIFXYU

      I guess gays would rather be flamboyent for a few decades before being beheaded themselves and setting up the atheists, Christians, and Jews likewise to be beheaded than stay in the closet in peace and allow humanity to thrive around them.

      People who think "religion is evil" have handed the entire world to the Muslims. You'll see how evil religion can be, fool. Can you convince them that you're a Muslim when the time comes? I'm an atheist libertarian, but I can and will play the Muslim if it means allying with them to destroy the traitors within the West who destroyed our culture. Do you know any such traitors?

      Environmentalism is a hoax. There is no point of no return; we haven't passed it; we'll never reach it; there's no need to reverse course.

      The Muslim demographic time bomb is real. If there is hope of reversing course, you better start preaching the Christian morality that begat the West, even if you're an atheist, as am I. Or the Muslims will decapitate you after they win. They won't decapitate me, though. I'll become one of them.

    88. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Depends on the family. I know people who've been completely disowned by their parents (and I think the friend in particular is going to become one of those, I just hope she's strong enough to take it), but I also know people whose parents, once they got over the initial shock, have become completely supportive and proud.

      Trans is something that there just doesn't seem to be a middle ground. For people who it isn't a problem, they'll let you know right away, with pretty much the responses you laid out. For the rest, it IS a problem for them, and many of them get so entrenched in defending WHY they feel it's a problem (and justify why they can continue to act ignorantly, or tell you to change, or todays lie from the excuse-o-rama) that cutting off contact is the only practical/healthy solution.

      ... because family can be really, REALLY vicious, and undermining.

    89. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Why would a gay man want a wife? Do you seriously not understand what homosexuality is? If he wants a partner than he can, gasp, find another gay guy and marry him.

      Now he might want children which requires a woman but that does not mean he wants a wife. More like an egg donor. Then you've got the same situation as any other infertile couple. All the other feelings just aren't and never will be there.

    90. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And how's that being-a-dickhead problem coming along?

    91. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Rakishi · · Score: 2

      Odd, so far I've been handed religious texts by people, seen protests by people, heard loud outdoor preaching by people and even had them come to my door to bother me. None of those people were talking about atheism.

      Or do you call it bothering only if they preach something you don't agree with?

    92. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I'm just impressed that he understood that "you're" is a contraction.

    93. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the on-iDevice microphone hears you mention Justin Bieber's ass it shows you a pair of tits?

      Showing tits to a homosexual man would not get any reaction, or maybe disgust. Ie. it wouldn't work.

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks. Atleast I know I can somehow just suddenly decide and stop being interested in other girls, no matter how hard I'd try. It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change.

      you can, its called classical conditioning. with the freedom of complete control over a persons life u can just about "cure" anything(younger the better).

    94. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Kohath · · Score: 2

      Why would a gay man want a wife?

      Maybe he wants his children to grow up in a home with both a Mom and a Dad.

      People who want children often want this. Many consider it a good choice, perhaps even the best choice. Kids don't often wish their mom or dad would die (or disappear) and their remaining parent would move a same sex partner into the home.

    95. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      (plus sticking a reproductive organ into a digestive tract is just disgusting for so many reasons)

      ... and yet it was a form of birth control between heterosexual couples throughout history.

      Now here's the obvious question - do you feel the same way about blow jobs? Is that also disgusting? After all, it really just involves sticking a reproductive organ in the OTHER end of the digestive tract. How about cunnilingus?

    96. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am not disagreeing with your message, but feel that your quote needs some clarification:

      "whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life"

      Keep in mind if you believe in such things, Satan and other such demons believe in Christ. I am not entirely sure they are happy with their condition.

    97. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Seumas · · Score: 1

      It's not a matter of "curing" homosexuality. It's a matter of our society not truly embracing the fundamental foundations of our country. Namely, the right to pursuit of your own happiness. Autonomy. The right to determine your own path in life, so long as you bring no direct negative consequence to an unwilling person.

      Anyway, some self loathing gay men try to compensate by founding "ministries" like this and bashing the gay out of others in the hopes that it hides their own cock-hunger. Others become politicians -- the kind of politicians that sponsor extremely hateful legislation that undermines the pursuit of one's own way in the world.

      Rational people just don't put that much energy and attention into something like that if it isn't a direct personal "demon" that they're fighting. Rational people just say "I don't want a cock in my ass, so the best way for me to avoid it is not to take a cock in the ass" and if other people want a cock in their asses, that's their business. And people carry on.

      It's unfortunate that people like that can't just accept who they are and live a fulfilling life. Instead, they spend their whole life hiding it and aiding the very people and organizations that make their own life a living hell. A sort of vicious circle. Until someone uncovers their secret, of course. And then they go into cock-rehab (like Ted Haggart did . . . and Larry Craig, if I recall?).

    98. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Judge not" meant "don't act like a legal judge and execute people when you're not legally authorized to act like a judge and the Romans are in power, not the Jews" in that context, not "don't acknowledge that people are sinning and that the law would require their execution by duly authorized legal judges if Jews were in power". I wish people were still literate. "Oh, hey, look! Jesus said we can do whatever we want, and nobody is allowed to state our wickedness any more!" Wow, good thing for atheists, since Christians can't judge! We'd have murderers all over the place, right?

      Even if we make believe that Jesus was saying what you wish he were saying, people have nothing to fear from judging adulterers because when that measure is meted back to them, they'll be fine. So I'm not sure what corrupt people really gain from misinterpreting that passage. They're only really forbidding equally corrupt people from criticizing them. I can hate you for your wickedness all day long because I'm damn righteous.

    99. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because feelings are natural doesn't mean we shouldn't be ashamed of them - take the seven deadly sins for instance. Pride, Envy, Greed, Lust, Gluttony, Sloth, and Wrath are fairly natural (or arise naturally in some situations) and yet most people would be ashamed to realize that that is how they feel. Without firsthand knowledge of how it feels to be LGBT, it is hard to judge how much suppressing these feelings would harm someone. For that matter, I'd be highly doubtful that the level of harm would be universal, in that the existence of bisexuals seems indicative of some type of continuum between homo- and heterosexual feelings. Unless and until we find the "gay gene" there remains the possibility that it is a product of the environment rather than innate, in which case a change in environment could potentially alter someone's orientation. For that matter, I'm pretty sure they still allow astrology and other junk science in the app store, so even if the premise of the program is known to be false, that is not a reason to deny access for those who wish it. If Apple were sending it out to everyone, I can readily understand the anger, but if you are considering this app, presumably you want to learn how not to be gay (or want to see it to mock it).

    100. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Seumas · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What do the particular details of your bullshit idiocy matter? Specific quotes from a piece of text aren't very relevant when the fundamental problem with the whole thing is IT'S ALL FUCKING IMAGINARY.

      I mean, seriously, believe whatever the hell you want to believe. That's your right. But I have no intellectual obligation to know your crazy religious bullshit intimately and exhaustively to justify not believing in your crazy shit. I don't need to know every lyric to every fucking Justin Bieber song to know that I don't give a fuck about Justin Bieber. The only people who care about pedantic religious bullshit are pedantic religious bullshitters.

    101. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      The Bible doesn't say you can't be a homosexual, or that you should hide or lie about being homosexual, it just says that you shouldn't have sex with a person of the same gender.

      Since you bring up gender, what about transsexuals. Is it okay for a transsexual woman to have sex with a man? After all, she still has an XY pair. If not, then is it okay for her to have sex with another woman, because, after all, she still has an XY pair? How about the case back in the 'early 80s where both married partners got a sex change? What about women with AIS (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome). Their birth certificate always said female, but their genes say XY.

    102. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      If teh gay affects their life and they want to change it, who the hell are you to tell them they can't?

      I also don't have the authority to tell a sea turtle it can't want to soar with the eagles, but reality still says it can't.

    103. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by gandhi_2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      cure someone from listening to metal

      Everything after Kill 'Em All created a lot of "former metal fans".

      Ergo

      Wanna know how I know you're gay?

    104. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 0

      However, that doesn't make homosexuality okay. It perverts the entire point of there being a difference between man and woman in the first place (plus sticking a reproductive organ into a digestive tract is just disgusting for so many reasons).

      It sounds to me like you're saying that your god wasn't powerful or smart enough to make sticking a reproductive organ into a digestive tract not feel good.

      Alternately, he's trying to fuck with you and/or put temptation out there for you. A god who does that isn't worthy of worship or even respect.

      I just don't see any version of this conundrum which makes the god in question seem more mature than the average six year old child.

    105. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Right, because physiologically and biologically ingrained urges and the fundamental basis of your sexuality and personality are exactly like having a craving for burritos or trying not to step on cracks in sidewalks.

      If someone is gay and unhappy about it, it's because they're beaten down by a society that crushes them from early on in life for something that shouldn't matter to anyone but themselves. Why else do you think that the two common reactions to life for gay people are to either be latent, repressed, spiteful, hateful, anti-gay politicians and activists or militant, out-there, hardcore pro-gay?

      And don't think for a minute that if the "straight life-style" was under the same scrutiny and judgement that you and I wouldn't tend to react in much the same ways.

      It's a free world and you have the right to subscribe to some ridiculous "make me like vagina" propaganda if you like. Just like you have the right to mutilate yourself with the assistance of a plastic surgeon, because you're not happy with yourself. But in both cases, you're most likely just fine . . . separated from the bigoted light of society.

    106. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I mostly assume you're kidding, but there actually are a few (not very well regarded, I imagine) biblical scholars which have postulated this in all seriousness.

    107. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Since marriage has nothing to do with religion, but is a process in which two people are certified by a state official in the eyes of the government and the law as a unified entity with shared responsibilities and accountability, I don't see what anyone's hangups are. In fact, I'm pretty damn sure the same person applies the same state seal to marriage licenses as to filing joint corporations. Someone's religious bullshit aside (and, again, not part of the equation, since religion has nothing to do with a legal marriage), I don't see how anyone can take issue with it. If one believes "gay marriage" shouldn't be officiated, then they must logically also believe that gay people can't go into business and form corporations. Or, for that matter, sign any contracts whatsoever.

    108. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Your religious bullshit is only relevant to people who subscribe to your religious bullshit. Kind of the way depicting Mohammed is some sort of "holy sin" . . . but YOU probably don't care about that because YOU don't subscribe to that faith. Likewise, I don't subscribe to your faith, either and so I don't give a fuck about your hangups. If your faith has an issue with you being gay, don't be gay. Or don't subscribe to that faith. Or be gay and be religious and be conflicted. That's your deal. How other people live their lives is irrelevant and none of your concern.

    109. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      The Bible says that bats are a type of bird, and that it's OK to attack another village, murder all the men, and rape the women. Why anyone puts any faith in that book is beyond me.

    110. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      If you're going to quote Romans at least put it in context. Paul says that the wages of sin is death. In other words, no one who has sinned can ever be worthy of a perfectly just god. That's the entire reason for sacrificial atonement in the old testament. That's the entire reason Jesus was sent to earth to die, so that the law of the old testament could be fulfilled once and for all.

      The whole thing makes zero sense.

      So in the OT, God says that if you're imperfect in any way, then you deserve death (since no normal human can avoid sloth, anger, lust, or lying at some point in their lives). So after a few thousand years, God suddenly "feels bad" about this, and sends his Son, who's really part of him, to "fulfill the law for once and for all"? Why did God make the law that way in the first place then, if he was going to change it later? God changed his mind? Isn't God supposed to be all-knowing? A truly omnipotent God would never change his mind.

      It's amazing what kind of wacky logical contortions Christians will make to justify their faith.

    111. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Jesus_666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, I think it's just that since sane Christians are rarely talked about, the insane ones are the ones hogging the average Slashdotter's perception of active Christians. It's really like with regular people and things like nuclear power. You don't hear about when a power plant works exactly as advertised but every one that doesn't gets a lot of media attention. Since images of failing, dirty and/or dangerous NPPs dominate the public's perception it's hard to blame the public for thinking that NPPs are inherently dangerous, dirty and constantly on the verge of failing.

      Since the numbers of stories about sane believers and batshit ones aren't even remotely proportional to the number of people in each group it can be hard to get a proper sense of scale. In fact, this cuts both ways: Because sane Christians aren't as news-worthy we don't talk about them as much (in the context of their religious beliefs), which might give the impression that Slashdot has a more negative view of Christianity as a whole than it actually has.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    112. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Howitzer86 · · Score: 1

      That was too easy.

    113. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually sexual conventions are more societal than people want to admit. Either this, or it just so happens that everyone in Greece was a homosexual pedophile. People are herd animals. They will go with the crowd no matter which way it is heading. For evidence of this take a look at all the fashions. If you can convince someone to wear a pair of bell bottums, or that hippity hop music is cool, convincing them that sucking dick is a good thing is not too hard.

        I really want to wear a purple cape around, and cookie monster slippers. It is my natural inclination, and what I would feel most comfortable in. However, I subvert my own fashion sense, towards the group fashion sensibilities, and wear 'normal' clothes. The church wants you to do this with you sexual inclinations. It IS possible. I can not fault the church for fighting the good fight and trying to maintain the status quo (that is their job). Just as I really can't fault you for trying to push the boundaries.

      If anything, you should be happy, because your side is winning. The world is getting gayer and gayer everyday. Pretty soon everyone will own a Mac and be wearing pink singlets. 8-)

    114. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Draek · · Score: 1

      As an aside, I don't understand anyways how one could "cure" homosexuality. It's like saying you can cure someone from listening to metal, or from liking steaks. Atleast I know I can somehow just suddenly decide and stop being interested in other girls, no matter how hard I'd try. It's a fact, and at the age of 28 I do quite think I know myself well enough to know that it's not just something anyone can change.

      True, but given the right treatment you could always be convinced that it's wrong to act on those impulses, and while you may continue being attracted towards females, you'll cease to *act* like an heterosexual and as such look like a proper member of our society.

      It's what we do with pedophilia, necrophilia and all the other "evil" paraphilias in fact.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    115. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      If ya gotta use an emote, it just ain't funny no more. And yeah, the chick thing. :-)

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    116. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      I'm just impressed that he understood that "you're" is a contraction.

      Sorry. That's the way us old fogies spell 'ur'. No, not 'ur'.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    117. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt your gay friends/acquaintences have "shagged' many straight men at all. Now, they've probably "shagged" a great many bisexual men who identify as straight...

      See the difference there?

      There is such a thing as situational homosexuality (like in prisons) but even that I think requires someone be a Kinsey 1 or higher rather than a Kinsey 0 (on the sexual orientation scale, where 0 = 100% heterosexual, and 6 = 100% homosexual). I mean, "any port in a storm" and all. But there's a huge difference between what one does out of desire and what one does out of desperation. I will eat things I hate if I'm starving, after all. But we're not talking about such situations. We're talking about innate preferences.

      I also know people who have a philial/sexual split... heterophilial (only fall in love with women) but homosexual (only sexually attracted to men). Their lives are a constant misery, to be honest, and I don't envy them one whit.

      On the other side of the scale, I know someone who is completely asexual. Androgynous looking male physically, but not only no interest in any sex at all, but no real comprehension of sexual attraction or sexual desire at all.

      Humans are mighty complicated, especially when it comes to sexuality. It's not like there's a binary switch that is in either the heterosexual position (mostly) or the homosexual position (sometimes). And it's certainly not a switch one can flip at will (or even with great effort). It's more like a point in three-space that is relatively fixed by the time one gets to the stage of walking and talking.

      At least so it seems to me.

    118. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Rei · · Score: 2

      Wow, your Bible sure has some elaborate secret messages hiding between the seemingly obvious plain text saying "judge not". Is it in lemon juice and you have to hold it up to a source of heat to reveal it?

      --
      Man on crucifix terrorizes church, demands they eat his flesh and blood. Details at 11.
    119. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, exactly, is a "sane christian"?

      Is it, or can it ever be, sane to worship idols and deities? What you're really talking about is the degree of insanity involved: some christians are less batshit crazy than other christians. Or at least they're able to give the appearance of being such.

      A cult is a cult is a cult...

    120. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by supersloshy · · Score: 1

      Yet it is posed as such. Especially when something is questioned you get the response: "It says so in the bible and because bible is always true then it is so."

      By Protestants, who basically took the Bible, removed books from it, and claimed that it alone is the sole rule of faith, which completely ignores several hundred years of Catholic history. Saying that the Bible is the sole rule of faith is like saying that a video game manual is the only reliable resource for information on a video game, how to play it, secrets and whatnot. The New Testament, as well as the modern Old Testament, was arranged and preserved by the Catholic Church itself, therefore taking an incomplete version of the Bible and claiming (with no good reason) that it's the sole rule of faith is just illogical.

      Really? I quite happen to enjoy being on the receiving side.

      Bacteria? Heath effects?

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    121. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      Odd, so far I've been handed religious texts by people, seen protests by people, heard loud outdoor preaching by people and even had them come to my door to bother me. None of those people were talking about atheism.

      Or do you call it bothering only if they preach something you don't agree with?

      No, mostly I call it preaching when it's objectionally tasteless. So yes, generally when I disagree with it. But also when I agree with it, but don't agree with the manner in which it is delivered. For an example of this second statement, read your OP that I was criticizing.

      On an unrelated note, don't believe that everyone who criticizes you, also disagrees with you. That's another problem with the way-too-outspoken-atheist crowd. Somehow, they think that a) they have to be louder than the way-too-outspoken-religion crowd, and b) Each and every single person I encounter who is vehemently opposed to religion is also opposed to being critiqued. Trust me brother, we're on the same side. I just don't want you making me look dumb by association.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    122. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      And how's that being-a-dickhead problem coming along?

      Well, I've come out of the closet ... but the acceptance of my alternative lifestyle hasn't arrived. *Shrugs*. I guess not all lifestyle choices are equally valid, no matter what society says.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    123. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by billstewart · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm a vegetarian, and I can't agree with them. Humans are naturally omnivores, and we've been cooking meat over fire for several hundred thousand years (rather long than I'd have expected), and, well, cooked meat is tasty. I don't eat it because of the ethical issues with killing animals for food, but that doesn't make them stop tasting good.

      Now, they might be able to cure you of disliking vegetables, if they've got any cooking skills, but that's really a separate problem.

      --

      Bill Stewart
      New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    124. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read the Song of Solomon sometime.
      He writes about making love to another man.
      It's past time to throw that document out as a belief system because it's all bigoted hate.
      enough already. :P

    125. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

      Not marking judgement one way or the other on the whole efficacy of trying to make a gay man straight, but one thing needed remarked on:

      ...you'll find that they haven't lost the "temptation"...

      Last I checked, temptation never goes away, for anything that tempts. Even as a straight guy who's happily married, pretty young ladies still attract the eye (and some thoughts that I'm sure most of /. wouldn't find too alien). Let's remove religion altogether: If you find an average person who smoked for decades and then quit. I'm willing to wager that he or she still get some sort of urge if another person lights up a ciggie in their presence... even years later (I once quit smoking for 3 years... even years afterwards, I still dreamt of smoking a cigarette, and experiencing an urge to light up whenever my ex or her father lit one up).

      Over time, the urge may dull (for *any* temptation), but I doubt that any credible Christian organization would say that temptation goes away entirely, especially if you just barely gave it up (whatever "it" may be).

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    126. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Isn't it also a form of lying to know that you're homosexual deep inside but try to pose as a heterosexual person, both to yourself and possible partners and outside society

      The assumption is that you arent "a homosexual deep inside" in any way that could ever be testably shown (for instance, we know it is not "simply genetic").

      Heres a shocker-- noone can thoroughly explain what makes someone homosexual, and thus people tend to disagree on whether its innate or not.

    127. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      Interesting, so you responded to my broad insult of Christianity (a specific religion, note, not all religions) with a broad insult of atheism? So I take it then that not being a hypocrite isn't part of life philosophy?

      See, the real difference between you and me is that unlike you I'm freely going to admit to being an asshole on here. It's what I do. It's fun. I don't need convoluted justifications to make how I act more palatable to myself like you appear to.

      Although I do love how you assume I'm opposed to all religions and a militant atheist. I'll put that on my list along with the time some atheist called me a fundie after I made fun of what he was saying.

    128. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by pastorhack · · Score: 2

      Romans actually lays out the theology of it quite well. Allow me to explain (no, is too long, I will sum up) 1. God is perfect. 2. The wage of sin is death. 3. God made a covenant with Abraham, In a covenant at that time, the penalty for breaking the covenant was death. Rather than allowing Abraham to signify that he would pay the penalty ( because, Abraham wasn't perfect) God agreed to pay the penalty for man's sin & die in our place. 4. This was followed by hundreds of years of people trying to be perfect on their own, culminating in us killing God because He tried reaching out to the lost rather than hang out in the nice people club. 5. Christ rose from the dead, breaking our bond to sin and death. ... Point being, without the bad news (you're not perfect and will die) there is no good news ( Jesus died so you can live forever). As you said, no normal human being can avoid sin, but we have a bad habit of pretending we can. As a Christian, the most loving thing I can do for someone is share with them the amazing loving truth that changed my life. The point isn't "you're gay so you're going to hell" it's "apart from Christ you will go to hell, just as I would have"

    129. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by monkyyy · · Score: 1

      "The Bible doesn't say you can't be a homosexual, or that you should hide or lie about being homosexual, it just says that you shouldn't have sex with a person of the same gender."
      agreed, i`d say all people are "born with" adultery, and yet no one opposes it when someone says its wrong and leaves it at that(as in not stoning people)

      --
      warning pointless sig
    130. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The homosexuality of the homophobic evangelicals is well documented:

      Bob Moorehead

      Roy Clements

      John Paulk

      Paul Crouch

      Ted Haggard

      Paul Barnes

      Lonnie Latham

      George Alan Rekers

      So its not without merit

    131. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will you please tell me why I find the male figure disgusting but have the hots for male-to-female transexuals, cock and all?

    132. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to bash Christianity, it's your right, but you should at least learn what mainstream Christian's believe

      Define "mainstream Christians"
      I think you'll find that the mainstream of American Christians are barely/non-practicing, but feel free to show otherwise.
      Next week's assignment: compare and contrast mainstream christians vs mainstream christian doctrine.

      (hint: the majority of /.ers seem to have a very poor caricature of Christianity in their heads, and seldom if ever actually know what Christians are saying or doing)

      hint: the majority of Christians seem to have a very poor caricature of Christianity in their heads.

    133. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Antisyzygy · · Score: 1

      You realize Paul was a murdering bastard right? He had his cronies kills those who opposed him, mainly the Jewish/Gnostic Christians. He is as bad as Muhammad, and rewrote the scriptures to suite his own power lust just the same. Jesus may have been a good guy, but the majority of popular and modern organized religions are a power construct to keep people under control of a few. Scientology is just a rehash of the same old pattern that gave rise to all modern religions. Its the same shit as the first tribal shaman that figured out when an eclipse may take place and told his people when it would occur while claiming "divine knowledge". They used it to their advantage to get special treatment as a king when its just some natural explanation available to all who seek it. I hate religion for this reason, it encourages stupidity and sheep mentality, and it prevents people from reaching their full potential. Religion creates people like Joel Osteen or the TBN assholes, or L. Ron Hubbard, or Hovind. They are all Misleader's trying to skim money out of uneducated peoples' wallets as well as undeserved reverence.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
    134. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by pastorhack · · Score: 1

      I apologize for whatever happened to make you hate the Gospel so much. I would encourage you to read "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist" by Norm Geisler and Frank Turek, wonderful Philosophical, mathematical, and scientific treatise. Ultimately, the most profitable book would be the Bible, but that doesn't seem to interest you.

    135. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      You can encourage your politicians to hate Americans -- then those politicians will notice that financial sector of your country is being run by people they hate, and in turn will take that control away.

      And no, I don't know better solution, hatred is the most you can get out of politicians, so use that.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    136. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      It makes perfect sense if you just assume that God isn't all-loving, and is really quite the divine dick.

      1. Make rules that are impossible for anyone to obey.
      2. Declare that the punishment for the tiniest infringement is death and eternal torture. If anyone criticises, say that as a just God you must enforce the law.
      3. Invent a loophole - say, sacrificing your son to take the blame - that allows people you choose to get away with breaking the rules.
      4. Use the loophole to grant salvation to those who accept it by bowing down and worshiping you.
      5. Bask in the glory of their terrified adorations.

    137. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      I've known some of the people they shagged. I think most people are too scared to be bi-sexual and have orgies, well now a-days anyhow. I'd say they where often bi-curious or more didn't give a toss/up for anything once.

      Sex ain't love and love ain't marriage... I don't think I could live with a man (or they couldn't live with me and I couldn't live with that), but I'd probably like it up the Arse and my Mrs won't use a strap on though I have other female friends who would.

      as they say, it ain't what you do it's the way that you do it.

      If I wanted to cum I'd get some porno or some friends with loose fitting cloths round or use my imagination, buy a dildo and have a wank. I don't usually find men who are in touch with their emotions enough and not competitive and can hold a good conversation and put makeup on and paint my toenails and able to moderate their sex drive.

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    138. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      You'd need to screw with dopamine. Perhaps something involving the administration of narcotics in conjunction with gay sex?

    139. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      see I'm quite in control of my emotions, and I generally work of/with other peoples desires... often it's very hard to find that dynamic in someone else... but I don't really care what sex they are or what they look like I'm more a personality person and I tend to find a lot of other people are like that or just go for things that look nice (their vocabulary is usually pretty limited though!)

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    140. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      It's basically what Exodus does too - it's all based on group treatments to maximise the use of peer pressure, including group shameing, and intensive religious teaching. And it actually appears to work... for a short time. A few months of the hell of Exodus treatments, and the subject learns to act properly heterosexual to fit in, even believing it themself. But it's just an act, the program has a very high reversion rate - exactly how high, Exodus refuses to reveal. The subjects tend to return to their old gay ways as soon as they leave the program. Even the ministry's founder had to step down after he was caught flirting in a gay nightclub.

    141. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      Using :-) just makes us look old, not humourless. Young emoters have no nose.

    142. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      The rest of us just get to be as camp as society will allow. Now, when the gays try to own campdom, *that* annoys me!

    143. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Showing tits to a homosexual man would not get any reaction, or maybe disgust. Ie. it wouldn't work.

      Funnily enough, a lot of the homosexual men I know finds boobs kinda fascinating. Perhaps not in a sexual arousal sense, but they certainly aren't disgusted. (Usual disclaimers about this just being personal experience with a very small sample size apply!)

    144. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      And to you I recommend "I'm too much of a tosspot to be allowed Internet access". Perhaps take it to share with your Reading Group.

    145. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Warwick+Allison · · Score: 1

      Err, yes, "if". TFA is *about* outside parties. If a black person is raised with anti-black hatred and hates themselves, is the solution to change their skin, or to teach them that the hatred was wrong?

      More fairly, to use your analogy, a transsexual man who is that way because his mother burned effigies of men his whole childhood might better receive councelling, while the transsexual that is simply born with that particular wiring should not. Get it? Too complicated?

    146. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by AAWood · · Score: 1

      Whoa, dude. Ease back there.

      Look, an atheist telling a theist "Your belief is bullshit" is about as reasonable, useful, and likely to work as a theist telling an atheist the same. Ultimately, both boil down to one basic belief: that there is or is not a supernatural entity or entities "in charge" of everything.* It can't be disproved because this theoretical entity could simply control the test results, and can't be proven because the entity being described inevitably won't display itself in any provable form. There's simply no point in trying to fight that battle, from either side.

      Therefore, when a particular aspect of a belief causes conflict with yours, theistic or atheistic, you are *far* more like to have an informed, progressive debate by accepting the opposing parties belief, and working to change their view on *that aspect* within their own existing framework. If you have no interest in that or lack the specific knowledge to do so, that's fine; stay out of the debate. Like you said; believe whatever you want, that's your right.

      * (OK, this isn't necessarily the case for *all* religions, but the basic conflict is the same... faith, or lack of, in something which falls outside of something directly provable.)

    147. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      saying it's possible to 'cure gay' is just like saying you can 'cure straight'

      I've long suspected that this may be actually be true. Of the three lesbians that I know well enough to know their private life histories, each of them was sexually abused by a male family member. Of course, it may just be coincidence and the sexual abuse didn't lead to their homosexuality, but I currently don't believe that. By the way, they all seem to be happy with the results.

    148. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Vegemeister · · Score: 1

      Since he was killed as a sacrifice for us, we can be forgiven for our sins and are no longer sentenced to death.

      Er, why? That's quite poetic and the symbolism is cool, but it doesn't make any sense.

    149. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by dbIII · · Score: 1

      A lot of it is some that some very simplistic "religeous" groups can have an "other" they can point to as being a bunch of dangerous evil outsiders that their flock/marks should band together to protect against. These days it's gays, before it was people with dark skin. That's where those "Bible Colleges" first came from - schools where none of those dark skinned people could go while unlike those run by the state or mainstream religeon. It's different now and a different false enemy but that's how these groups work - especially the ones run for profit.

    150. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by realityimpaired · · Score: 2

      Pro tip: women don't always mean somebody they're intimate with when they use the word "girlfriend". The woman I'm in a romantic relationship with is actually sitting right next to me, and laughing at your comment.

    151. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      If the on-iDevice microphone hears you mention Justin Bieber's ass it shows you a pair of tits?

      Showing tits to a homosexual man would not get any reaction, or maybe disgust. Ie. it wouldn't work.

      An acquaintance reportedly tried it: took off her shirt, climbed on a gay man's lap, and rubbed her fine set all over his face. Got no reaction at all.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    152. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      This app is an attempt at that pill. It almost certainly doesn't work, and deserves as much derision as snake oil diet pills. But unless people are being forced to use it, there's nothing immoral going on here.

      Selling (or distributing) a "cure" for something when you know (or ought to know) that it will not work is very immoral unless great pains have been taken to indicate that this "cure" is not likely to work.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    153. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      However, that doesn't make homosexuality okay. It perverts the entire point of there being a difference between man and woman in the first place

      Then I guess those notorious gay penguins are bound straight for Hell.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    154. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Now, they might be able to cure you of disliking vegetables, if they've got any cooking skills, but that's really a separate problem.

      They could start by not serving a plate piled high with broccoli every other time you dine out.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    155. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bacteria? Heath effects?

      Condoms?

      If God didn't want people to be homosexual, why did he put one of your G-spots inside your anus?

    156. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by the+entropy · · Score: 2

      It's interesting that you simply prove the GP's point about having a very poor caricature of Christianity when basing your refutation of what he says on said caricature.

      When discussing "Death" or "Hell" in the Christian sense one needs to understand that this stands not for non-(or un-)existence, but rather "existence separate from God". So yes, it is easy to see that any person who does something wrong deserves to be separated from God, that is, Death.

      Why did God make the law that way in the first place then, if he was going to change it later? God changed his mind? Isn't God supposed to be all-knowing? A truly omnipotent God would never change his mind.

      He never did change his mind. A sinner still deserves death. However, being a loving God he can choose to give Life as a gift. (And again here, Life not as 'existence' but rather as 'existence with God'. God can choose to be with a person who doesn't deserve it)

      One last thing, when discussing things like 'before' and 'after' or God 'suddenly [anything]' one must realize that any God that is omnipotent and omniscient stands outside of time. Anyone who insists on discussing God as being within time misunderstands the natures of both God(if he exists) and the Universe. Reading 'A Brief History of Time' by Stephen Hawking is particularly enlightening on the nature of the Universe and of time. Reading 'Mere Christianity' by C.S. Lewis is very useful on understanding what Christians believe. If you're going to have any success in discussing anything with anyone, it is very important to understand their world view, even if you think it all nonsense.

    157. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by black_lbi · · Score: 1

      I have read the Bible and it's clear for anyone who thinks objectively that the whole thing is thought and written by men, not by a god.
      I could also recommend books by Dawkins or Hitchins, if we're on this subject.
      You are not right in your beliefs, you only think you are.

    158. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Being gay /= "lifestyle choice", thats your first fuck up

    159. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Male G-spot?

      You're just missing out.

    160. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by realityimpaired · · Score: 2

      I think what it is is boils down to is that some people start their self-definition with what's between their legs. When they find out that it's malleable, and based on something much deeper, it challenges them to self-examine in a way that they have never done before, and they feel threatened by that. Some of those people lash out, and attack transgenders saying it's unnatural, an abomination, or some other hateful crap rather than taking a moment to look into themselves and come to an understanding of who/what they are that isn't dependant on how others perceive them. Ignorance is bliss, and people will defend their happiness with their lives.

      For what it's worth, it doesn't seem to have any tie in to religion. I know some very religious people who are transgenders (or cis allies), and I also know some incredibly bigoted people who proclaim themselves atheists. Actually, I've seen more people who are devoutly religious* that are accepting of people who are LGBT than not, though admittedly I'm not exactly in a strictly fundamentalist area, or country for that matter. Where I'm at, we have public health care, and it covers gender reassignment therapy and surgery.

      * - The religions I'm exposed to on a regular basis are the pagan community (shaman, heathen, wiccan, druid, etc... I belong to that community myself, and they're very accepting in general), as well as all 3 of the Abrahamic religons, and Hindus, Seikhs, and Buddhists. I actually know an FtM Muslim, whose Imam had written to the high Imam in Jordan to ask whether he should be praying with the men or the women, and the answer that came back was that God defined man/woman based on what's in the heart, not the body, and that he should pray with the men.

    161. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      So in the OT, God says that if you're imperfect in any way, then you deserve death (since no normal human can avoid sloth, anger, lust, or lying at some point in their lives).

      If you read the bible charitably (hold on for a second, I don't mean to accept the magical shit, just to assume that it's based on something real) then the story goes that before Eve ate of the apple, that there was no death. From a science-fiction point of view that suggests (within the mythology of the story) that death is caused by something that she contracted by eating that fruit. And given that the Apple could be just a placeholder for something else, let's just agree to call it the apple for the duration of this conversation.

      We know that people live longer without medicine if they do not engage in animal husbandry since they don't tend to get animal diseases. The Pomo people of what is now Lake County, California used to regularly live to over 100 years of age eating a diet consisting primarily of acorn meal and wild game, with plenty of other wild plant material. You can't turn back the clock, though. The land would no longer sustain that lifestyle in part due to the ordinary paces of progress and in part because the US Government paid people to plant black walnuts, which were never environmentally beneficial to the region, and which you cannot live on alone as you can with acorns.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    162. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This app is an attempt at that pill. It almost certainly doesn't work, and deserves as much derision as snake oil diet pills. But unless people are being forced to use it, there's nothing immoral going on here.

      Let someone put a basically identical but diametrically opposed app on the store and then we'll talk. As a political experiment, someone should be submitting an app designed to turn you straight. Someone around here ought to be able to bang that out in less than a day. If Apple approves it then I will agree that there is nothing immoral going on here.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    163. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      Interesting, so you responded to my broad insult of Christianity (a specific religion, note, not all religions) with a broad insult of atheism? So I take it then that not being a hypocrite isn't part of life philosophy?

      See, the real difference between you and me is that unlike you I'm freely going to admit to being an asshole on here. It's what I do. It's fun. I don't need convoluted justifications to make how I act more palatable to myself like you appear to.

      Although I do love how you assume I'm opposed to all religions and a militant atheist. I'll put that on my list along with the time some atheist called me a fundie after I made fun of what he was saying.

      I'm using your broad insults to create other, inversely proportional insults. That way, when I respond to your criticism with the exact opposite, and you refute my criticism, I only have to refer you to your rebuttal in order to disprove your rebuttal. What an interesting paradox! If your rebuttal disproves itself, can it be used as proof of inadequacy?

      You see, I was being hypocritical on purpose. You, due to your inclusion of "Me me me" statements, don't have quite the same defense.

      But thanks for coming out.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    164. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      So then you would have to agree that the best solution is to allow same-sex marriage, since the health concerns you talk about (increased cancer risk) are more associated with multiple partners, in both same-sex and hetero relationships.

    165. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Auroch · · Score: 1

      You can encourage your politicians to hate Americans -- then those politicians will notice that financial sector of your country is being run by people they hate, and in turn will take that control away.

      And no, I don't know better solution, hatred is the most you can get out of politicians, so use that.

      Actually, that's *not* how politics works. AT least, not outside the usa. Thanks for trying to apply your narrow world view to a broader problem of global economics, though.

      --
      Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Are there any other real reasons to spend all that money on generic hardware?
    166. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Bible doesn't say "apple," it just says "fruit," but that's neither here nor there.

      One problem with this story is that death is actually necessary for living organisms to eat, grow, and reproduce. Any time you eat a plant or animal, it dies. In the case of fruit, of course, the bush or tree can go on living, but the potential trees and bushes borne in the seeds will die.

      Cells die all the time as a normal part of your body's growth and metabolism. The death of an organism is simply the death of all its cells.

      Take a look at your hand. You have five fingers, yes? In the womb, your hand grew in a sort of flipper shape until the fingers were separated by the death of the cells in between them!

      I suppose there's some science-fiction way for a world to be free of death, but it would not resemble our world and I'm not even sure you could call Adam and Eve "human" if there was no death. Their bodies would have to work very differently from ours.

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    167. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I suppose there's some science-fiction way for a world to be free of death, but it would not resemble our world and I'm not even sure you could call Adam and Eve "human" if there was no death. Their bodies would have to work very differently from ours.

      To suggest that we must die because individual cells die is to assume an awful lot.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    168. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      To suggest that we must die because individual cells die is to assume an awful lot.

      Not really - life can and does continue indefinitely through cell division. Every child is a continuation of the lives of the parents, and all of our biosphere is essentially one big branching life - a continuation of the first metabolizing, reproducing cells.

      Whether you want to interpret "no death" as meaning organisms can live indefinitely despite the continuing death of most of their cells is up to you, but there really is no quantifiable difference in one cell dying vs. all of a body's cells dying.

      Also you'd have to have some explanation for such creatures to be impervious to drowning, suffocating, starving, dehydrating, fires, lightning strikes etc. etc. which is still compatible with living cells necessarily dying to perpetuate growth and reproduction.

      The Book of Genesis clearly shows life before the fall was intended to reproduce. Seed-bearing plants were created on the third day, and on the fifth day God told the creatures of the sea and the birds to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.

      Of course, perpetual exponential growth is impossible in a finite world, so inevitably some must die for others to be born. In a world with no death, ever-multiplying creatures is a plan destined to fail.

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    169. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>or to teach them that the hatred was wrong?

      That's a mighty normative statement you're making there.

      Ignore the dimwits at Exodus who think their counseling works.

      You're essentially saying that any gay (or more likely bi-) person who honestly would prefer to be straight is "wrong" for having those feelings.

    170. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Of course, perpetual exponential growth is impossible in a finite world, so inevitably some must die for others to be born. In a world with no death, ever-multiplying creatures is a plan destined to fail.

      In a world with no accidental death, there may still be intentional death. If animals are meant to eat each other, and bacteria are meant to eat the leftovers, and none of it ever mutates then it's all very static and boring but you can still have "eternal" life as long as nobody ever kills you. If the creatures simply don't eat you then you win. I'm not saying this is how it was or that it's even possible, just chewing up thoughts and spitting them out.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    171. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by amanaplanacanalpanam · · Score: 1

      It's like saying you can cure someone ... from liking steaks.

      I agree with your comment, but I bet PETA is working on just such an app. Maybe something showing a slaughter in all its gory.

    172. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by sakdoctor · · Score: 1

      That's brilliant!
      Because there is so much interpretation in religious texts anyway, we need a book that reads the users mind, and presents nothing more or less than exactly what they want to read. The ultimate confirmation bias. It will be the best seller of all time.

    173. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      True enough. The story doesn't actually say there was no death before the fall - God just says they will die if they eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, implying that they already know what death is.

      When God banishes them from the Garden, he gives the reason as to prevent them from eating from the Tree of Life and living forever. Interestingly, he didn't command them not to eat of that tree, so presumably it was okay for them to be immortal as long as they didn't know good from evil.

      Obviously the story came before modern science, so it can't be expected to be consistent with what we now know about biology. It was meant to explain where we came from and why we are the way we are - why we raise our own food, dress in clothing, have only one mate, etc. I leave it to the fundamentalists to work out how it could literally be true.

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
    174. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by simstick · · Score: 1

      I could cure you of liking meat in one day by taking you through the supply chain unless you were a sociopath killer or retarded and couldn't comprehend what you were seeing.

      --
      The best way to ruin your hobby is to try to make a living at it. Waiting on the paperless office since 1997
    175. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A truly omnipotent God would never change his mind.

      He never did change his mind.

      Except for that one time when he suddenly regretted creating humans, birds, and land animals, and decided to wipe them out with a flood?

      Why would an omnipotent, omniscient God ever regret anything he did?

    176. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by centuren · · Score: 1

      If you're going to quote Romans at least put it in context. Paul says that the wages of sin is death. In other words, no one who has sinned can ever be worthy of a perfectly just god. That's the entire reason for sacrificial atonement in the old testament. That's the entire reason Jesus was sent to earth to die, so that the law of the old testament could be fulfilled once and for all. Paul is listing out sins in those verses. Let me list a few others: lying, sloth, lust, anger. God doesn't see any of these as any worse than another. Each and every one carries a sentence of death. But Jesus was crucified as the perfect sacrifice. Perfect in life, he is the only one who doesn't deserve to die for his sins. Since he was killed as a sacrifice for us, we can be forgiven for our sins and are no longer sentenced to death. This is hardly a call to kill people who sin.

      There are some other verses you should consider (oddly enough, also from Romans) "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord." Romans 12:19, NIV

      If you want to bash Christianity, it's your right, but you should at least learn what mainstream Christian's believe (hint: the majority of /.ers seem to have a very poor caricature of Christianity in their heads, and seldom if ever actually know what Christians are saying or doing)

      The death and ressurrection of Jesus is a pretty important facet of the Christian faith. I think you'll need more than a few passages from one book to argue your point, especially when so many other explanations for Jesus having to die on the cross have been debated well. Are you dismissing the "original sin" as relevant to the topic? What about the fact that humans all, even after Jesus died as a sacrifice, still die (a post-Adam/Eve phenomenom, which could easily have been changed back by God after the death of Christ). What about any number of other suggestions backed by picking out statements made by other biblical figures in other books?

    177. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by centuren · · Score: 1

      A truly omnipotent God would never change his mind.

      One thing seems likely to me: a truly omnipotent God would unlikely ever be understood or interpreted by mortal minds like ours. To support your point about God changing his mind on humans deserving death, well, he could have done a bit more in that area.

    178. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by centuren · · Score: 1

      The Bible doesn't say you can't be a homosexual, or that you should hide or lie about being homosexual, it just says that you shouldn't have sex with a person of the same gender.

      Or for any purpose other than procreation. Any Christian attack on homosexual sex is pretty much an attack on modern heterosexual sex, unless you adhere to the obvious strict guidelines.

      It also says you shouldn't do a ton of things that are listed as being just as bad, and many of these things are pretty much universally ignored. It's true, accepting homosexuality as who one is makes it unlikely to repent the sin incurred, but not anymore than ignoring any one single thing listed as a sin or wrong (one is unlikely to repent for actions, or lack of actions, never brought into the conscious mind as a source of damnation).

    179. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by pipelayerification · · Score: 1

      That's why I quit associating with vegetarians. Lack of meat kills their sense of humor.

    180. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by centuren · · Score: 1

      I'm a vegetarian, and I can't agree with them. Humans are naturally omnivores, and we've been cooking meat over fire for several hundred thousand years (rather long than I'd have expected), and, well, cooked meat is tasty. I don't eat it because of the ethical issues with killing animals for food, but that doesn't make them stop tasting good.

      Now, they might be able to cure you of disliking vegetables, if they've got any cooking skills, but that's really a separate problem.

      Interestingly, I spent a few years as a vegetarian and then vegan, and the concept that it was wrong to kill animals for food was never a convincing argument for me. I have issues with how certain industries generally go about it in the USA (along with many, more practical reasons), but the actual raising and slaughter of animals has always seemed like something one just feels is wrong or doesn't. It makes for an interesting ethics topic, because how can one debate the ethics of something that a person simply believes or not.

    181. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      . I leave it to the fundamentalists to work out how it could literally be true.

      I was raised by a self-avowed atheist (reformed catholic) single mother and occasionally visted by a highly hypocritical claimed lutheran alcoholic father, and for several years attended a baptist church day care because it was the only affordable option; today I am nominally a "soft" agnostic. But I find the Christian mythology highly fascinating and much more familiar than other, similar works, and it's a lot of fun to speculate about what could be true or based on truth. As a science fiction fan I often speculate from a wannabe-scientific standpoint (in that I am not well-trained in any scientific discipline) as to what it could mean if it is not all bullshit meant to control people. I don't particularly know whether I even think this Jesus or Jeshua or wtfever his name was guy ever existed. It's just a great bunch of material to ponder.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    182. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The snarks were saying this app should have a grindr type interface. So you could use it to find any nearby ex-gays.

    183. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by simstick · · Score: 1

      Actually I have a great sense of humor. It's just a big issue with me. When you meat me in real life it takes a long time to figure out that I am a vegatarian, a political independent, I read slashdot, and am straight. Just like with religion I try to evangelize by deeds and work and not just talking and show and am always willing to listen to someone's arguments who is passionate about their position as it usually adds strength to mine.

      --
      The best way to ruin your hobby is to try to make a living at it. Waiting on the paperless office since 1997
    184. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by mean+pun · · Score: 1

      There's no "rational" reason to consider prostitution wrong; isn't it by two consenting adults?

      In most western societies prostitution is strongly associated with organized crime and most prostitutes are not really consenting, but are forced into prostitution by poverty or other external reasons. Also, since sexuality is so strongly tied with emotions, I strongly suspect that the chances of mental problems are high. I'm not aware of hard evidence of this, though.

      You're trying to apply modern logic and beliefs on a biblical stance (homosexuality) that's been around for thousands of years. It's your call if you choose to believe in God and the Bible but to make a subjective declaration in rebellion to what's been written for 2000 years is a bit foolhardy.

      What do you mean, 'trying'? I am applying logic.

      If you chose to base your opinion on a religious text rather than rational thought that's your call, but that doesn't change the conclusion of the logical reasoning. And no, using words like 'subjective', 'foolhardy', or 'rebellion' doesn't change that either.

    185. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by wild_berry · · Score: 1

      You aren't a mainstream Christian if you think that*. Penal Atonement is a minority view of what the Cross does for mankind's relationship with God. It makes sense to a human but it can't be the true explanation because it requires God to make humanity susceptible to fail God's rules, then have God step in and sacrifice God to God to break those rules and 'satisfy' God of something when most of it is breaking God's rules.

      Any idea how unfair it seems of God has to hold you or me to God's rules? Or that we must 'adore' or 'worship' such a deity in such a setup?

      *: Penal atonement, that Jesus on the cross is a sacrifice which satisfies God's need to have someone pay for the sins of the world.

    186. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      I think, you overestimate intelligence of your politicians. If it worked any other way, American crooks wouldn't run finances in the first place.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    187. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The obvious comeback is: "Religious? There's an app for that!".

      I'm more worried by: "Ethical? There's an app for that!", or "Law-abiding? There's an app for that!".

    188. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by pclminion · · Score: 1

      I've seen all the revolting pictures. I don't need to see it in person to know it's bad. However, this is no reason to stop eating meat -- I just insist on knowing a hell of a lot more about how the animal was raised and killed than I used to. In practice this means I buy from small local farmers and more than once I've actually been out to the farm beforehand to check things out. It sounds like Portlandia but that's because I live in Portland ;-)

      Now, one can make a pretty strong argument that this kind of farming just isn't feasible to feed the entire world's population, and if you made such an argument, I'd agree with you. But I can only fix myself, and so that's what I'm focused on.

    189. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      Don't assume that there are no such cults outside religion. There are plenty of people who operate on an unsubstantiated belief of some sort, whether that belief is "God exists", "the Middle East will always be unstable" or "we'll achieve breakeven on hydrogen fusion within the next fifteen years". Yes, hydrogen fusion is something we can observe but a working fusion power plant using today's designs isn't. Likewise things like string theory (mathematically possible but as far as I know nobody has yet proven it actually applies to the universe). Everytime someone just assumes that somehing nontrivial is true you have an example of faith.

      Christianity is, of course, a rather large memeplex compared to, say, "light is both a particle and a wave" (for people who don't have the neccessary means and knowledge to independently verify that*). However, most people just take a subset of it and believe in that. Even less is the subset of it that actually applies to their daily lives. Christianity offers many answers but most of them are to questions that don't concern most people, like "What happens to me after I die?". (And no, "Where does man come from?" does not qualify. Everyone sane agrees that the creation stories in the Bible are allegories made by people who didn't have paleontology.)

      More importantly, faith just isn't that important to most people. Even those who do believe that God exists (or who just observe Pascal's Wager) usually just apply the fundamental tenets to their lives (conveniently, those are the same tenets our society is built around) and only concern themselves with the rest if the need arises. The existence of an unknowable superbeing is essentially a matter of opinion.

      How many people do you know who "just know" that Linux is superior/inferior to the NT kernel? Or that nuclear power is inherently safe/unsafe? Or even "God doesn't exist", which is belief just like the opposite? Usually those are similar cases of someone taking a meme or memeplex and just assuming it to be true. According to your reasoning, that would make all of us insane; at least I know nobody who doesn' believe anything they haven't verified themselves.

      For the record, as far as the Christian god is concerned I don't believe either way; I'm agnostic. There may be one or more deities but I don't know and I will most likely never find out.


      * Yes, we can just point at the peer-reviewed papers regarding that topic but then we end up with the meme of "peer review ensures good science", which is another example of something usually just asserted to be true that would be a major hassle to independently verify.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    190. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congratulations on your reasonably civilized interpretation of your religion. I have bad news for you: most Christians I know are not so civilized; specifically, they are happy to ignore the golden rule and rationalize tribal behavior.

      Addressing one of the ancestor posts, claiming Christians have reasonable motivations just because you have is like claiming all Republicans or whatever group have equally reasonable motivations. I congratulate you on not using your religion as a mace and rationalization for hatred, but that's not uniformly how your religion is used. (Likewise atheism or other philosophy - not singling out religion or your religion here.)

      Point being, arguments of this nature boil down to unfounded generalizations that your (presumably) non-hateful motivations represent those of the group you've joined. Not so; and you can make pretty clear arguments that the aggregate behavior of some of those groups is motivated by hate, or at least not by empathy or the golden rule. (Instead of "hate" I should say "tribal differences" or something, since aggregate behavior isn't really subject to anthropomorphism. Sometimes you have to look at the rules of the game dispassionately and realize they lead to something you may not agree with personally.)

      In the US, at least, you'll have to accept that Christians, aggregately, oppose homosexuality specifically and act as if they hate gays. Maybe you can address this by trying to change the action of your community, or supporting some Christian gay advocacy group or something.

    191. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      You said penal, hur hur

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    192. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      Then maybe Christians should stop referencing the bible all together, instead of cherry-picking the bits they think god *really* meant.

      If the bible is as flawed as you say it is (and I am not arguing that point), why not throw it away all together and come up with another book to live by. Either write it yourself, or wait for a deity to appear and write it for you.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    193. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Until I realized that I might not be straight I had no idea that I wasn't. Then within about 10 minutes a lot of my life started to make sense

      I'd have thought the keen interest in musical theatre and gladiator movies might have given you a clue earlier:-)

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    194. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible_Project That might not turn out as well as you'd hope...

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    195. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1
      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    196. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      Gender Identity has nothing to do with chromosomes. It has to do with the identity of self-awareness. I've been struggling with the concept of a binary gender system, but can definitely acknowledge that at 39, I don't know it all. But from what I do know, is if I'm a female, or male, it has nothing to do with equipment or genes, it's how I perceive myself as a person. Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity are exclusive, they're not connected, you can have any and all genders being asexual, homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual. It's not that being one limits the others.

      --
      E8B8B
    197. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Gender Identity has nothing to do with chromosomes. It has to do with the identity of self-awareness. I've been struggling with the concept of a binary gender system, but can definitely acknowledge that at 39, I don't know it all. But from what I do know, is if I'm a female, or male, it has nothing to do with equipment or genes, it's how I perceive myself as a person. Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity are exclusive, they're not connected, you can have any and all genders being asexual, homosexual, bisexual or heterosexual. It's not that being one limits the others.

      While gender identity doesn't have to match your "equipment", and, at least for m2f transsexuals, appears to be influenced by a lack of testosterone in the uterus during the first trimester, to say that it has "nothing to do" with genes is an over-statement. The lack of testosterone in the first trimester, causing the BSTc region to not develop as "male", is because the fetus doesn't release the right quantities of testosterone at the right times, and/or because of selective insensitivity to the hormone, and/or interference by the uterine environment in the process.

      Hormones, brain, and behavior, Volume 5

      Testosterone is secreted in increasing amounts during 3 independent periods in the life of the human male. These are during intrauterine life, neonatal period, and during puberty.

      This testosterone secretion by the fetus, as well as the fetus' receptivity to the secreted testosterone, are both genetically determined.

      So your gender identity can certainly be influenced by both your genes and other biological forces. To ignore the underlying biology and say flat out that it's not possible for someone to be "born that way" leaves the door open to the haters to mistakenly claim that "it's just a matter of lifestyle choice."

    198. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I was caught up in broad generalization, I think it can play a part, but I wouldn't expect it to be the case for all TG's nor the case for all those lacking hormone release at the developmental stages of their lives.

      --
      E8B8B
    199. Re:There really is an app for everything :P by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Ok, let me see if I have this right: Jahweh/Jehovah/God, purported to be an all-powerful (omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient) entity, created us humans, but condemned us to death (or some kind of horrible afterlife, or even no afterlife at all) for being imperfect and flawed, even though he created us that way. So, we act just the way he created us to be, and just the way he must have known we would be (since he's omniscient, which by definition means you know the future), and then he hates us for it? And the only way to get out of this condemnation is to worship his son (who's really part of him, somehow)?

      Even more strangely, this same god seems to go through mood changes: in earlier times, he's angry and jealous, ordering his followers to attack other villages, murder all the men, and rape the women and children. Then his son comes and preaches peace and love. Huh?

      Something doesn't add up about the whole thing.

      As for your points, those don't quite make sense either, namely #3-4. How can God "die"? That doesn't even make sense, unless he's like those Greek gods in Star Trek who derive their power from people worshiping them. Why would God enter a covenant, knowing (as he's omniscient remember) that it'll turn out badly?

      I'm a recovering Catholic BTW, and even though I've been preached this stuff for most of my life, none of it makes a bit of sense to me. I can't even fathom how anyone else can be a Christian because it just plain doesn't make any sense to me.

  4. Free speech by SheeEttin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How nice for them.
    "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

    1. Re:Free speech by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would normally agree with you quite vehemently, but Apple has already taken it upon themselves to act as 'moral guide' by denying pornographic apps. In doing so, they are no longer defending all freedom of expression, and thus can't legitimately claim to be taking a stand for free speech in allowing this.

    2. Re:Free speech by Yaa+101 · · Score: 1

      Exodus International finance that lesbians get raped in Afrika, I give shit about their free speech to be honest.

    3. Re:Free speech by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I am gay, I consider Exodus International's activities deceptively cruel to the point of fraud, and I find the app itself offensive.

      And I hope that Apple allows the app to remain in the App Store.

      No one has a right to not be offended. If the principle of free speech means anything it means that offensive speech is also allowed and protected, or it's a hollow and hypocritical principle. Even so-called "hate speech" is still just "speech" that expresses a feeling of "hate". It should be allowed.

      Just categorize the app accurately: put it with the fart apps.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    4. Re:Free speech by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that before the iOS App Store launched, Steve Jobs himself said that pornography would not be allowed. Apple guidelines have been less clear on other aspects but they have been clear on pornography. Their reasoning was that the store was supposed to cater to families. While it is possible for them to install all sorts of parental controls to prevent access to pornography for children, it is far easier not to have it in the first place. In this aspect, Steve Jobs openly endorsed Android if you want porn.

      “You know, there’s a porn store for Android,” Jobs said. “You can download nothing but porn. You can download porn, your kids can download porn. That’s a place we don’t want to go, so we’re not going to go there.”

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:Free speech by proverbialcow · · Score: 2

      Seconded. Rephrasing the OPs comment to this conclusion: "I may not agree with what Apple does, but I defend their right to do it, as long as they're consistent."

      --
      The only surefire protection against Microsoft infections is abstinence. - The Onion
    6. Re:Free speech by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Well, yes and no.

      From a "Free Speech" angle, I agree. While Apple certainly has the "right" to not accept anything they feel may damage their image--it's their store, after all--because they are the only store, they have an "obligation" to not judge based on content. For example, banning porn apps is bad (especially when they have a rating system already in place to keep them away from those who perhaps shouldn't be viewing such material).

      Where I disagree has not so much to do with the content of the App, but the fact that it's an App at all.

      When Apple first released the iPhone, the mantra was that people could make websites customized for the iPhone. Developers complained that without Flash, they were limited to what they could do. They couldn't take advantage of the various sensors available in the iPhone, etc. So Apple came out with a way for developers to write real applications. So now everybody does an App--even if all the App does is display web pages. This is where the App Store ends up getting polluted.

      In my opinion, if the App doesn't do anything worthwhile that can't be done on a webpage, I'd say don't accept it. I rashly assume that this App fits the bill.

    7. Re:Free speech by matt_gaia · · Score: 2

      If that's his logic on the store (promoting a "family-friendly" culture), then how in the hell did this app make it on to the store? Something like this doesn't do a thing to promote family values to anyone but the fringe Westboro Baptist Church types. That being said, I also hope this is on the marketplace and filed in with the fart apps and rated as low as humanly possible.

    8. Re:Free speech by oliverthered · · Score: 1

      I'm a homosexual sadist and downloaded this app straight (no pun intended) away.

      Fuck those poof NAZIS, fuck them till their ring bleeds... ooooohhhhh yeh boy... fuck em, fuck em gooooooood....

      Tissue anyone?

      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    9. Re:Free speech by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      So now everybody does an App--even if all the App does is display web pages. This is where the App Store ends up getting polluted.

      In my opinion, if the App doesn't do anything worthwhile that can't be done on a webpage, I'd say don't accept it. I rashly assume that this App fits the bill.

      I agree. I've downloaded this app to see if maybe I can inject some fact based opinion in the conversation here (I must be new here, right) and it does seem to be just a front-end that downloads pages straight from their website (created with a lame automatic app-creation tool . No added value at all. I'd ban it for that, not for the content even though I completely disagree with it.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    10. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Agreed. This is the same company that donated $100,000 in the 2008 California election to defeat Prop 8 and defend the rights of homosexuals to marry in the state, so I doubt it was anything about anti-homosexuality.

      I'm also a gay man and can't see this app being removed. The last thing I want to be is part of the crowd that does things like remove references in textbooks to the US being a democracy like Utah. Removing access to opposing views is never the best way to remove ignorance.

    11. Re:Free speech by quantaman · · Score: 1

      How nice for them.

      "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

      But that has never been Apple's policy with app store, they've actually been fairly strict with what apps they've allowed and I'm not sure everyone is clear exactly what the guidelines are.

      Now I don't think for a moment that Apple actually agrees with the "Gay Cure" app, but I wouldn't blame someone for thinking that Apple accepting an app means Apple agrees with it.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    12. Re:Free speech by tverbeek · · Score: 3

      Not all that rare. Just shouted down by the faction who don't really get it.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    13. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with your argument is that very young children now own iPhones ($49 iPhones from ATT probably don't help matters here). Apple is sensitive to the pornography issue because it could be perceived as a smut peddlar to underage children.

      I'm up in the air about the approval of this repulsive app. On one hand, the first amendment comes into play here. OTOH, would Apple allow a KKK-themed app? COULD THEY without being sued?

      When it comes to obscenity, I quote Tom Lehrer when I say, "I'm for it."

    14. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not actually all that rare.

      Most of the liberals I know, in fact, share that exact same view point. But then I don't know anyone who lives in Berkley, CA (which seems to have a very vocal minority of librals... a permanently offended hippie thing going on that has nothing to do with actual Liberalism).

      Just saying. Don't base your notion of what "Liberal" is on what right-wing and conservative talking heads say it is. They're even more wrong on that topic than they are on most others.

    15. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What have you got against fart apps?

    16. Re:Free speech by Sensiblemonkey · · Score: 0

      Not all that rare. Just shouted down by the faction who don't really get it.

      Someone please mod this up.

    17. Re:Free speech by Cogneato · · Score: 1

      Like you, I am gay and comfortable with it. The problem with this app is that it is not made for you and me. It is made to prey upon those that are depressed, confused, and suffering. Given the significantly higher suicide rates in gay youth, an app like this could be considered dangerous. I don't own an iPhone, but my guess is that Apple hasn't approved any apps that are specifically designed to incite self destructive behavior in depressed individuals.

      We can debate whether or not Apple's policies are right, but they do exist and are applied, so they should at least be consistent within themselves. If Apple is going to have a policy of banning certain apps as being inappropriate, then this would seem to fall well within the realm of being inappropriate.

    18. Re:Free speech by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It absolutely should be allowed, so long as apps presenting the opposite viewpoint are also allowed and given the same "safety" rating.

    19. Re:Free speech by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Even so-called "hate speech" is still just "speech" that expresses a feeling of "hate". It should be allowed.

      No, hate speech should not be allowed for the same reason that yelling "fire" in a crowded locked room should not be allowed. Its purpose isn't to communicate ideas, but to specifically engineer damage to human beings.

    20. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ignoring all moral concerns, Apple is a corporation. Their response to pornography can more easily be seen as them covering their ass rather than acting as moral guides. Pornography raises many legal challenges, especially in certain jurisdictions. This bullshit app on the other hand is fairly safe.

    21. Re:Free speech by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Refusing to display pornographic material is not an affront to free speech. Pictures of naked people engaging in sex acts is not an idea.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    22. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... denying pornographic apps. In doing so, they are no longer defending all freedom of expression.

      I suggest you call out the Supreme Court first, then get around to Apple some other time.

    23. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We're not free to "express" everything however we choose. For instance, I hate you for being an ignorant moron. If I were to express that hatred in certain ways, I would be executed by the government. I'm sure you can appreciate that deterrent.

      Similarly, you can be lustful for various things, but you're not free to "express" that lust any way you'd like.

      There is no "freedom of expression", and "expression" has gotten far more free than is healthy or the Founders ever intended. The Constitution only protects political, religious, philosophical, and scientific speech, not exhibitionism and voyeurism.

      Grow up. Porn is for children.

    24. Re:Free speech by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      So the bottom line is you are OK with censoring anything, if someone is censoring one thing already.

      OK then.

      I find the app abhorrent but I think it's better one questionable thing in ten be allowed than none of the ten.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    25. Re:Free speech by Draek · · Score: 1

      True, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't defend them, regardless of where Apple may fall on the issue.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    26. Re:Free speech by imroy · · Score: 1

      No one has a right to not be offended.

      True. But the issue with these organisations that claim to "cure homosexuality" isn't offence. People are being sold a lie and their "service" basically involves homosexuals being taught to hate themselves. As if that isn't bad enough, parents are sending their (possibly) homosexual children to these camps and told the same, often against their will. Their treatment, and the continued pressure from others around them (parents and family members, friends, preachers) often drive these people to self harm or even suicide.

      This organisation destroys lives: Former Ex-Gay Leaders Apologize

      No decent person would should accept any material from this vile group, or other groups like them.

    27. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a ton of respect for this commenter until the last line. Until that, I completely agree.

    28. Re:Free speech by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      I think the problem is that Apple has already made it clear that they *have* taken the position of moral arbiter for apps on their devices, and "free speech" is not one of the factors they consider. Once they have done that, then by definition whatever they allow in the App Store passes their moral code.

      And before anyone disagrees, this is a DIRECT quote from their App Store guidelines:

      "We view Apps different than books or songs, which we do not curate. If you want to criticize a religion, write a book. If you want to describe sex, write a book or a song, or create a medical app."

      And more specifically:

      "14.1 Any app that is defamatory, offensive, mean-spirited, or likely to place the targeted individual or group in harms way will be rejected."

      So yes, it sounds like Apple believes that people do have a right not to be offended, at least as far as their App Store is concerned. So they don't consider it offensive??

    29. Re:Free speech by Shihar · · Score: 1

      In the words of the awesome 80s flick WarGames, "the only winning move is not to play." Apple decided to play. They ban apps that are objectionable. Hell, Apple bans apps because they don't like how they use the volume key or they think your icon is ugly. As soon as they start making value judgments, they get to be judged on what they do and do not allow into the market. The simple alternative is just to play it like Google, allow everything, and only ban truly malicious code.

      Personally, as much as I think those "gay cure" pieces of shit deserve to rot in hell (pity it isn't real) for the vast amounts of human suffering and misery they have inflicted upon the world, I also think that they should be allowed to preach their stupid. Then again, I also think it is okay if a camera app can use the volume control as a shutter button.

    30. Re:Free speech by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      While I wouldn't be surprised, such serious accusations need evidence.

      http://www.thegaymanifesto.com/2010/04/12/christian-ministry-exodus-international-advocates-gay-lesbian-corpse-desecration/ http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2008/05/628/ http://www.divamag.co.uk/diva/update.asp
      It would appear that it is a common practice in Africa and some other regions to rape lesbians in the belief that this will turn them gay, but I can't find any direct link in which Exodus International endorses this or finances an organisation that does. It's a practice of similar but unrelated churches. However, it does appear they were involved (Like some other US ministries) in pressuring the Ugandan government to pass it's law jailing gay-rights activists and executing homosexuals - which sounds just as bad, really.

    31. Re:Free speech by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I suspect it's purpose is advertising, so people can find it when browsing the app store and do it get publicity from the contriversy.

    32. Re:Free speech by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Blocking stuff based on a maturity rating is a heck of a lot different than blocking stuff based n whether you agree with it or not.

      I suppose the FCC might as well start blocking shows that it finds "subversive"?

    33. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you mean 'faggot' apps, right..?!

    34. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One question - would you be saying the same thing if it was an Android app?

      In other words, are you not offended because it's Apple who did it or because that sort of thing never offends you anyway? (if it's the latter, BTW, then I applaud you as a person, like myself, who doesn't go through life trying to find things to be offended about.)

    35. Re:Free speech by click170 · · Score: 1

      Not that rare.
      I share his sexual preference and his opinion on the matter.

    36. Re:Free speech by black_lbi · · Score: 1

      I was always under the impression that hate speech is not merely a regular speech, but usually implies an instigation to harm against a certain group of people.
      It's one thing if I'm just a regular Joe and I say: "I don't like gay people" and it's quite another if I'm the leader of a religious movement and say: "All gay people are a disgrace to god and moral values and cannot be tolerated. I urge true believers to bring swift justice against them".
      I think that only the second example fits the hate speech category and should be punished.

    37. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem is it is just not about not being offended.

      Organization like Exodus actually do harm to people.
      They say one can change his sexuality by taking "reparative therapy". They focus on "environmental causes" of homosexuality so they make you confront your "dominant mother" or "distant father" etc. Family relationships suffer. And at best one wastes time and money on their therapy. At worst gets into a cycle of depression for not succeeding in therapy, which can be hugely distressing for young people from religious families.

    38. Re:Free speech by amanaplanacanalpanam · · Score: 1

      Refusing to display pornographic material is not an affront to free speech. Pictures of naked people engaging in sex acts is not an idea.

      No, but pictures are a form of expression, which is the concern here. Whether you call it freedom of speech or not is pedantic.

    39. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't applaud Apple for defending freedom of speech when the App Store is still "curated" and remains the only sanctioned way to install applications on your device.

    40. Re:Free speech by duguk · · Score: 1

      How nice for them. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

      "The app seeks to help niggers become white. It received a '4' rating from Apple, which indicates the company considered the app to contain 'no objectionable material.' The new smartphone app was released last week and is now available through iTunes. Exodus International claims to be 'the world's largest ministry to individuals and families impacted by blacks and coloureds.' A petition has been launched by Truth Wins Out, which describes itself as a non-profit organisation that fights anti-black religious extremism on the change.org website, asking Steve Jobs to intervene to remove the app."

      You'd defend me too, right?


      Written firmly with tongue placed in cheek. Personally I'm not offended by this being considered free speech. The problem is that Apple will allow this, but won't allow anyone else to have free speech. Apple - that's not what free speech is - you defend ALL speech, not just the homophobic bullshit you agree with.

    41. Re:Free speech by DarkVader · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much where I am with this one too.

      I consider it evil of Apple to censor the app store, especially considering that for the non-jailbroken devices, it's the only way to load software on the iDevices. I wish they would either set up a mechanism for loading unapproved software easily, or open the app store to anything that anyone does, with no censorship.

      But since they've taken the path of censoring, this app should be at the top of the list. It's pure evil, it's more obscene than a woman being fucked by a dog. And while I absolutely support the repulsive slime's right to say whatever they want, because Apple is allowing this on the app store when they reject so many other things, it's essentially an official Apple endorsement of this slime.

      The KKK hates jews, blacks, and gays. The only difference for Exodus is they leave out the blacks, and they're less vocal about the jews. They are abhorrent, and unless Apple goes to a completely content-neutral app approval policy, Apple supports them.

    42. Re:Free speech by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      Apple have already been blocking apps based on whether they agree with the 'message' or not (or at least based on what they think their customers will find offensive), so whether you consider maturity rated content fundamentally different is actually a moot point here.

    43. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember reading that one of those ExGay cults (don't know if it was exodus or another one) got shut down in new zealand years ago for basically "running a male brothel", i.e. the cult leader was not quite as ex-gay as he made out, and "relapsed" with new members...

    44. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Deceptively cruel to the point of fraud?

      It is on an Apple product so this is the norm.

    45. Re:Free speech by Ardeaem · · Score: 1

      No one has a right to not be offended. If the principle of free speech means anything it means that offensive speech is also allowed and protected, or it's a hollow and hypocritical principle. Even so-called "hate speech" is still just "speech" that expresses a feeling of "hate". It should be allowed.

      That is a rare viewpoint in the liberal ideology.

      That is liberal ideology; maybe you don't understand what the term "liberal" means?

    46. Re:Free speech by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      Why would it make a difference if it were an Android app? Wrong is wrong.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    47. Re:Free speech by berbo · · Score: 1

      I am gay, I consider Exodus International's activities deceptively cruel to the point of fraud, and I find the app itself offensive.

      And I hope that Apple allows the app to remain in the App Store.

      Yeah, right next to the 'horoscope' and 'enlarge your penis' apps.

    48. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not gay but I've been involved in the LGBTIQ rights lobby, and I couldn't disagree more. This app isn't an expression of 'free speech'. It's a tool to aid in the organised abuse of (mainly) vulnerable teenagers.

      I got into gay advocacy from the religious side of things (I hated what I saw my church doing to teenagers who were 'questionable' - I saw enormous harm done.) Maybe you have been there and you know this and you just disagree, and you're allowed to - you've been on the receiving end (I imagine) of intolerance where I haven't. But I just can't accept this sort of thing, in a free and tolerant society (we're supposed to be both).

      It talks about being gay like it's a disorder, and it offers a cure - that's practicing medicine (psychology), and we restrict that. In spite of 'free speech' protections, you aren't allowed to set up, claim to be a health professional, come up with a sham disease, and start 'curing' people. It's illegal - it's criminal.

      This is worse again - not only does it fall afoul of that criticism, but it's also immeasurably harmful, both to the gay people it abuses ('cures') and the straight people who end up stuck in miserable marriages to them so they can 'prove' how well the cure worked. The social pressure, the abuse, leveled at gay people in some (usually religious) communities is enormous. You got through - good on you - but the suicide rate is an order of magnitude higher among gay teens than among straight ones, and part of it is because we let people get away with psychological abuse under the guise of 'treating' a disorder, even though they wouldn't be allowed to treat any real disorder.

      I think people are sometimes a bit gun-shy when it comes to restricting rights, but for every rights restriction there's usually another side whose rights you're protecting, and society isn't about never restricting ANY rights - it's about a balancing act. Free speech is a particularly touchy issue, I know, but this isn't about free speech. It's about one group's right to engage in the psychological abuse of teenagers, weighed against the right of gay teenagers to grow up in a healthy environment. That shouldn't be a difficult call, but the anti-gay lobby keeps re-wording it as a free speech issue, which gets them enormous traction which they don't deserve.

    49. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I am gay" ---- Hahaha, what a gay :)

    50. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do have a question for you then. Lets say there is a Gay pride app. or something similar, based on your logic, that app. should be right down with the fart apps. as well.

      To be perfectly honest I do not believe these apps should be in the fart app section what-so-ever. Let both the Pro-homosexual and anti-homosexual apps sit in their own place within the app. store.

    51. Re:Free speech by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      I love you, regardless of your gender or mine.

      A reasoned, well-principled opinion that means you're not just faux-posturing in order to advance your own personal views? I wonder what the hell you're doing on slashdot.

      You must be a bot or a clever pro-Exodus astroturfer.

      --
      -Styopa
    52. Re:Free speech by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      Pictures of naked people engaging in sex acts is not an idea.

      I'd say it's a freakin excellent idea.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    53. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wonderful stand point, you are to be commended. I am totally opposed to the app and to anything that doesn't treat everyone with equal respect. Apple is doing the best it can to be fair and I think it's only appropriate that freedom of speech be protected. As to pornography, this is Apple's way of protecting young people from inappropriate material. This is NOT a freedom of speech issue, this is about being appropriate. I applaud Apple for trying to be fair and balanced and for their stand against porn. Apple has taken a stand to at least have a ethical standard, Android (the open place) has decided that it's the wild west and allows anything. It's just my opinion but I can't really support this model. Any entity that has that large of an impact on society has to have some moral responsibility. I don't have a problem with porn but I certainly don't want any of the youngsters I know to be exposed to it before they are reasoning adults.

      If you're offended, don't get it. The market place will resolve the issue. If there is a bigoted mindset that wants to have this app then it will thrive. It does not mean that you have to pay any attention to it.

    54. Re:Free speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they're not "acting as a 'moral guide' by denying pornographic apps" as you ignorently put it... they're covering their butts to make sure that children don't get a hold of pornographic apps through their company... so they don't get sued... are you going to after youtube for taking down videos of porn and blocking users that try to upload porn???

    55. Re:Free speech by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      Ok just how many homos are on /.? I swear I feel like I'm the only technofag in the universe most days.

      --
      E8B8B
    56. Re:Free speech by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 1

      Voltaire. Pretty much no longer part of the club of modern thought.

      --
      Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  5. Jobs is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gods > gays these days.

    1. Re:Jobs is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the beginning there was nothing, and then there was god who mysteriously appeared out of nowhere. Then he created the universe and humans in his image but he hates the gays. So help you if you're gay.... Christianity, making sense since day 1.

  6. Trojan Horse? by oliverthered · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well if it cures you of being Gay.. I don't think Apple will have many ....blank.....s left in the marketplace.

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
    1. Re:Trojan Horse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      iPhones?

    2. Re:Trojan Horse? by oliverthered · · Score: 1
      --
      thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  7. Oh come on. by 0m3gaMan · · Score: 0

    It's so absurd it's hilarious. Anyone who takes that app seriously -- and not good natured fun -- has a major problem.

    1. Re:Oh come on. by Miseph · · Score: 2

      I assume that you include the app's authors and publisher in this, yes? They take it quite seriously.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    2. Re:Oh come on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So... an app designed to turn black people white and de-black-ify their speech and appearance would just be good natured fun too? Just curious.

      Homosexuality is not a choice and is not a disease. It can no more be 'cured' than heterosexuality, or race, or eye color (you can put in colored contacts -- just like you can go into the closet -- but it doesn't change the underlying reality of your eye color -- or sexuality).

      The app is ignorant and bigoted and offensive, as well as pushing an agenda based on hatered and lies. That honestly sounds like 'good natured fun' to you? Really?

      I agree with you that the app is absurd. But I don't find it particularly hilarious, especially knowing the number of people damaged and even driven to suicide by anti-gay "ex-gay" programs. There's a real human cost here, and I just can't laugh at that.

    3. Re:Oh come on. by Brian_Ellenberger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The app is ignorant and bigoted and offensive, as well as pushing an agenda based on hatered and lies. That honestly sounds like 'good natured fun' to you? Really? I agree with you that the app is absurd. But I don't find it particularly hilarious, especially knowing the number of people damaged and even driven to suicide by anti-gay "ex-gay" programs. There's a real human cost here, and I just can't laugh at that.

      Then don't download the app. Neither you nor anyone else has the right to decide what speech is damaging. The human cost for the suppression of free speech is far far greater than anything this app could possible do.

      If this country oppressed free speech, then slavery may not have ended, Jim Crow may not have been defeated, and homosexuality may still have remained in the DSM as a mental disorder. At the time, speech proposing the end of any of those items was considered ignorant, offensive, and pushing an agenda based on lies.

      Moralities change in this country, and what is considered offensive, dangerous, and disgusting evolve and change. But through it all, we retain the right to speech and that is--more than anything else--what allows us to evolve as a society. It is the thin layer separating us as a free society from an oppressed one where some self-imposed leader decides what is right and what is wrong.

    4. Re:Oh come on. by Kohath · · Score: 1

      What is wrong with someone learning a new way of speaking and dressing? Would you deny these lessons to everyone, or just black folks?

    5. Re:Oh come on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are genetic predispositions for violence, alcoholism and all sorts of destructive behavior. Just because someone is genetically predisposed to act a certain way doesn't automatically make that behavior "normal" and ok. Religions have been in the business of persuading (or coercing) people to regulate their behavior for thousands of years, for better or for worse. I don't have enough information to judge this app in particular, but as a general rule it's certainly the right of religious institutions (or other well-meaning institutions in general) to help those who desire to take control over their impulses. You wouldn't call a dieting app bigoted because it suggests that there's something "wrong" with fat people (many times obesity is just a genetic condition, right?)

    6. Re:Oh come on. by supersloshy · · Score: 0

      [citation needed for your entire post]

      There is no "gay gene", JSYK. Homosexuality isn't decided like your hair color or eye color and that's scientifically absurd to state.

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    7. Re:Oh come on. by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      In general, I absolutely agree. In this specific case, Apple have already been censoring content they consider objectionable, and to turn around and cry 'free speech' now would be a blatant double standard.

    8. Re:Oh come on. by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      Homosexuality extends far beyond "stick[ing] your dick up some guys (sic) arse". It is being attracted to people of the same sex -- attraction to people is something that cannot be controlled. I don't choose who I'm attracted to, neither do homosexuals. The only thing homosexuals have any control over is whether or not they engage in sexual activity -- and frankly, if they are attracted to someone else, and that person is attracted to them, what exactly is the problem with them engaging in anything?

    9. Re:Oh come on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then don't download the app. Neither you nor anyone else has the right to decide what speech is damaging. The human cost for the suppression of free speech is far far greater than anything this app could possible do.

      Apple's app store has nothing to do with "free speech", so let's not pretend that it does. Given all the other speech Apple has suppressed in their app store, it is reasonable to ask them to suppress this as well, not because it is anti-gay, but because it makes spurious medical claims.

      But through it all, we retain the right to speech and that is--more than anything else--what allows us to evolve as a society

      Maybe Apple's app store should be subject to free speech requirements, given how important it has become. But for now, it is just a private corporate playground. Asking for "free speech" in Apple's app store only when it suits the right wing nuts is the wrong approach. Either it's free speech for all, or it's restrictions on all.

    10. Re:Oh come on. by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2

      Tell it to these researchers.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    11. Re:Oh come on. by lessthan · · Score: 1

      What did your link have to do with what you said? The only thing that wikimedia said is that there isn't aren't genes for characteristics, but a pattern of genes that creates a characteristic. It may be scientifically incorrect to say gay gene, but it amounts to the same thing for a layperson. Your genes are arranged in a certain way to give you your eye color, hair color, and probably your sexual preferences. As for a citation, let's have a thought experiment. I want you to visualize the most attractive person you have ever seen, personally. Did your stomach swoop? Did your heart miss a beat? Did, at any point, you decide to have these reactions? Did you, at any time before that moment, decide that you were going to be attracted to a person that gender, with that look? No? If you had no choice in your sexual preferences, why would I? Can you even put yourself in my shoes and mean it? It is a choice, right? The next time you see a blond muscle head, can you will yourself to lose your train of thought and blush all over? Choose homo for a day. Let's see how it goes.

      --
      Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
    12. Re:Oh come on. by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Homosexuality is not a choice and is not a disease. It can no more be 'cured' than heterosexuality, or race, or eye color (you can put in colored contacts -- just like you can go into the closet -- but it doesn't change the underlying reality of your eye color -- or sexuality).

      Is that a fact, or do you just really, really want it to be true?

    13. Re:Oh come on. by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      Yeah, as soon as the GP made his strawman racist app, I immediately thought, "Yeah. You know, there's a lot of people that could benefit from learning how to speak words correctly."

      Maybe we could do one for grammar and punctuation as well...

    14. Re:Oh come on. by Kohath · · Score: 1

      It's actually a great idea for an App. Easy to make, easy to attract (phony) controversy to get publicity to boost sales.

      And learning better vocabulary, diction, and grammar, and learning how to dress and act to appeal to various subcultures is extremely useful. And it's a good fit for the multimedia capabilities of the iPad and iPhone.

    15. Re:Oh come on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the iphone user were really that passionate about his freedoms then he wouldn't have bought an iphone in the first place.

    16. Re:Oh come on. by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 2

      Good point. Doesn't he remember being asked before being born if he wanted to be attracted to guys or girls? I do. It was right after the questions asking what I want my favorite color to be and if I want to be right or left handed. I can't imagine why anyone would chose the gay option given how much more difficult it would make their life. Perhaps he just wasn't properly informed about his choices. I guess he can complain to his god about that.

  8. And there's the problem with a "curated" appstore. by jpmorgan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Apple accepts this app and they're attacked for being anti-gay, supporting homophobia, etc... If Apple rejects this app, they'll be attacked for infringing on free speech, supporting a particular political agenda, etc... Either way, you're pissing customers off.

    But all I feel is schadenfreude. They got themselves into this mess by imposing editorial control over the iPhone in the first place. They made their bed, now they get to lie in it.

  9. Censor or not? by Kohath · · Score: 1

    It will be interesting to read how many people want this app censored. I'm guessing someone will even try to argue it was wrong to censor the Mark Fiore app but that Apple should censor this one.

    1. Re:Censor or not? by MoonBuggy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It was wrong to censor the Mark Fiore app, it is wrong to deny porn apps, but since that's the path Apple have chosen to take, I'd also expect them to censor an app which implies someone's sexuality is a thing which can or should be 'cured'.

      Apple should be supporting free speech, and if that were the case I would say that while I find the opinions of the app developer extremely unpleasant, I support their right to speak. But Apple aren't supporting free speech in general - if the conservative groups get censorship of content they find offensive, then the gay right groups damn well deserve the same treatment. By far the preferable option is to defend that which I despise just as strongly as that which I support, but the horse already bolted there.

    2. Re:Censor or not? by Kohath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'd also expect them to censor an app which implies someone's sexuality is a thing which can or should be 'cured'.

      Why? What if a guy wants to change? Shouldn't he be free to try? Or should other people decide "The Right Choice" for him?

      And maybe he can't be "cured", but maybe he can have a life that is closer to his preference. You'd deny him the opportunity to try?

    3. Re:Censor or not? by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      That's no shock at all. Someone who thinks that you can 'pray away the gay' is almost certainly someone who doesn't appreciate the observations of Mark Fiore.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    4. Re:Censor or not? by MoonBuggy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The very concept flies in the face of generally accepted science - consider the backlash you would (rightly) get if we were talking about race rather than sexuality, for example. That said, I support people's right to do and say whatever the hell they like, however stupid and potentially psychologically harmful, as long as it doesn't directly infringe on the rights and freedoms of others, but Apple are the ones who declared themselves moral arbiters here, and that changes this situation drastically.

      By rejecting apps they consider objectionable, they tacitly provide some level of endorsement to apps which are accepted; the have lost the right to claim that they disagree with anything that is said, because they have already taken steps to censor apps they disagree with, thus it is reasonable to deduce that if it is not censored, they do not disagree with it. By allowing this app into their curated "family friendly" store, they are declaring that the concept of homosexuality as a 'disease to be cured' is acceptable to them.

    5. Re:Censor or not? by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      I see it differently. It was wrong to censor the Mark Fiore app, it is wrong to deny porn apps... but that doesn't mean we shouldn't encourage Apple to do the right thing and not censor this. I don't imagine that will happen, because it would make them look like giant hypocrites. But I still hope they exercise some respect for free speech, and let this be.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    6. Re:Censor or not? by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      I know several gay men, and I've discussed this issue at length with them. It isn't their preference to live a "heterosexual life". It's that that is what society expects of them, therefore that is what they strive for.

    7. Re:Censor or not? by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      I can see the logic, but the message wouldn't be "We support free speech from this point onward", it'd be "We support the speech only of certain groups". Selectively allowing controversial content can only really be seen as endorsement of certain groups.

    8. Re:Censor or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why political correctness sucks. Since Apple doesn't allow porn, something you obviously treasure dearly, they should allow anything YOU deem unacceptable. Regardless of what is said here by anyone, this app and porn are not the same. Until two things are the "same" then they don't have to be judged the same. Sure, you can say BOTH are offensive to some people yet only one is banned. Oh well, get over yourself. Don't buy Apple products, but please stop crying. The whole group of you complainers should just grow up. Life isn't, (THANK GOD!) centered around what you think it should be. Oh, and I actually don't believe in God, just using it as an expression. Worry about you. You offend me. You should not be allowed to post on the internet.

      Apple owns their app store, and as such, they get to run it the way they want. Don't bitch.

    9. Re:Censor or not? by Rockoon · · Score: 0

      The very concept flies in the face of generally accepted science

      ...that people should decide things like this for themselves? According to you, that is against generally accepted science! Really? Did you even read what the person said that you replied to?

      You know whats worse than someone who hates homosexuals? Someone that can justify the closed-minded bullshit like you are spitting.. for there is no end in sight for your spitting, because you think its 'right' to lump an entire class of people together.

      If you are gay, just be fucking gay. Don't tell other people why they are gay. Don't try to claim that science tells other gay people why they are the exact same gay as you. I got a clue for you.. it doesnt fucking do that.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    10. Re:Censor or not? by Kohath · · Score: 1

      You're still arguing for a broadly defined policy with more censorship rather than a narrowly defined policy with less censorship.

    11. Re:Censor or not? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      he's not really talking about that.. he's talking about apple's publishing policy. apple is a censorious bitch that tends to be left-biased in terms of plebeian politics.

    12. Re:Censor or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would one go about changing race? As far as I can tell, race is a phenotype indicating physical characteristics and disease risks. Sexuality on the other hand is a set of feelings/desires and actions guided by those feelings. Feelings and desires can be conditioned - see Pavlov 's dog for instance. While I wouldn't advocate conditioning men to have an erection around attractive women and would view it as inhumane, the number of stories about married men realizing they are gay would seem to indicate that either sexuality can change or that it is possible to lead a life of another sexuality for a length of time if that is truly what you really want.

    13. Re:Censor or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? What if a guy wants to change? Shouldn't he be free to try? Or should other people decide "The Right Choice" for him?

      And maybe he can't be "cured", but maybe he can have a life that is closer to his preference. You'd deny him the opportunity to try?

      Does he need an app to do that?

    14. Re:Censor or not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd also expect them to censor an app which implies someone's sexuality is a thing which can or should be 'cured'.

      Why? What if a guy wants to change? Shouldn't he be free to try? Or should other people decide "The Right Choice" for him?

      And maybe he can't be "cured", but maybe he can have a life that is closer to his preference. You'd deny him the opportunity to try?

      It has nothing to do with the validity of the premise. Apple has banned some material because it is objectionable to Conservative Religious groups, but is allowing an app which is found equally offensive by Liberal Pro-Homosexual groups. It's a pretty clear indication of which group Apple supports, and which group it only tolerates because it's forced to by Law.

  10. Misleading by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The rating gets set based on what checkboxes the developer chose to tick while submitting the app.
    It doesn't mean that Apple thinks it is rating 4, it means the developers do.

    1. Re:Misleading by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 2

      But Apple can deny it if they don't agree with the given rating.

      --
      Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
    2. Re:Misleading by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Ultimately, Apple let them have the rating. You do realize that in the past Apple has gone to extremes to find reasons to deny applications because they can be used for things that aren't family friendly, even if the application requires the end user to specifically look for smut to find it.

  11. Streisand Effect in 3, 2, 1... by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

    Seriously. How many more downloads will be generated for it based on this press?

    1. Re:Streisand Effect in 3, 2, 1... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously. Stop repeating every phrase you read somewhere on the internets and try to understand what the Sreisand Effect was.

  12. All this app does is display the text: by dicobalt · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Stop using Apple products."

  13. 'Religion Cure' app? by bodski · · Score: 2

    Anyone have a 'Religiousness Cure' app handy that can help people become atheist? Would be fun to watch the reactions when Apple approve that one...

    1. Re:'Religion Cure' app? by Brian_Ellenberger · · Score: 2

      Anyone have a 'Religiousness Cure' app handy that can help people become atheist? Would be fun to watch the reactions when Apple approve that one...

      Apple has approved a number of atheist apps, including one using the mildly derogatory term "BibleThumper": http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/03/technology/03atheist.html

    2. Re:'Religion Cure' app? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny

      Anyone have a 'Religiousness Cure' app handy that can help people become atheist? Would be fun to watch the reactions when Apple approve that one...

      If reading the Bible doesn't turn people into atheists, no app is going to do it.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:'Religion Cure' app? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reading the bible is highly encouraged by churches because it tends to turn people into believers. It's amazing how well it works.

    4. Re:'Religion Cure' app? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Reading the bible is highly encouraged by churches because it tends to turn people into believers. It's amazing how well it works.

      Most believers never read the whole bible.

      Many pastors and priests never read the whole bible.

      Then again, the lack of general knowledge of many pastors is appalling. For example, claiming from the pulpit that man is the only creature that engages in same-sex activity and beastiality. Guess they never saw that dog humping their leg (none so blind as those who will not see). Or the over 400 species that engage in same-sex behavior.

      Reading the whole bible is a good cure - provided you read it with a truly open mind, and not as a blind believer who will accept everything, even nonsense, outright lies, and contradictions, on faith.

    5. Re:'Religion Cure' app? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      "These are the regulations for the guilt offering, which is most holy: The guilt offering is to be slaughtered in the place where the burnt offering is slaughtered, and its blood is to be splashed against the sides of the altar. All its fat shall be offered: the fat tail and the fat that covers the internal organs, both kidneys with the fat on them near the loins, and the long lobe of the liver, which is to be removed with the kidneys. The priest shall burn them on the altar as a food offering presented to the LORD. It is a guilt offering. Any male in a priest’s family may eat it, but it must be eaten in the sanctuary area; it is most holy."
      The whole of Leviticus is basically like that.

    6. Re:'Religion Cure' app? by berbo · · Score: 1
      "Thank you to God, for making me an atheist"
      -- Ricky Gervais @ Academy Awards

      http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/01/thank_god_for_ricky_gervais.php

  14. Fred Phelps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looking to stop being a dysfunctional homosexual? There's an app for that!

    If only we had a God hates fags app.

  15. The beginning of the end? by Spykk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It took awhile, but Apple is finally going to have to face the consequences for putting themselves in a position to choose what is and is not allowed to run on their devices. Next up expect a lawsuit because someone used an app that Apple approved for copyright infringement and then the snowball will really start to move.

    1. Re:The beginning of the end? by Duradin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Isn't deciding what to sell (and what not to sell) something that every retailer does on a daily basis?

      Should every store that does not sell everything be expecting a law suit?

    2. Re:The beginning of the end? by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 2, Informative

      OR you could read RTFA and find out this has happened before :

      "However, when faced with a similar issue last November, after an app was created around the Manhattan Declaration which is hostile to gay marriage, Apple came down on the side of gay rights and removed the app."

      OR you could have a look at the website and see that the app looks like pretty much just an app-version of their website, with a calendar and twitter feed and so on ... real scary stuff (!)

      Nah, let's just all stay ill-informed proceed with the hysterics.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    3. Re:The beginning of the end? by Spykk · · Score: 1

      Apple's app store cannot be compared to a retailer. If Walmart chooses not to carry something I can still buy it elsewhere. If Apple chooses not to allow something on the App store then you cannot install it on an unmodified IOS device. If there was a way to download this app directly from the developer and install it on your device then this would be a non-issue.

    4. Re:The beginning of the end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's slashdot. People here think they know what everyone else should do.

    5. Re:The beginning of the end? by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Isn't that elsewhere called "Android"?

    6. Re:The beginning of the end? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2

      The problem is that Apple has set itself up as the only store.

      Consider the magazine example. You own a magazine shop and you find Playboy, Penthouse, and their ilk offensive. You don't want to carry those magazines.

      Well, of course, you have every right to not carry them. However, it's likely that if you don't carry them, those customers who would buy those magazines will stop buying all their magazines from you. After all, a customer isn't going to buy Field & Stream and Guns & Ammo from your store and then go somewhere else to buy Playboy. They'll just go to the store that carries Field & Stream, Guns & Ammo, and Playboy. If 10% of your customers buy Playboy and other magazines, you've just lost 10% of your customers. That might also factor into your decision: Is it worth losing 10% of your customers by not carrying those magazines? But, again, you have every right to make this decision.

      Apple conveniently sidesteps this problem. To place Apple into the analogy, Apple owns the magazine shop and controls the zoning board so that they are the only magazine shop. Thus, they can make these decisions without fear of competition.

    7. Re:The beginning of the end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the same. Shops are limited both by storage/display capacity and it costs them money to carry a certain product. The apple app store suffers from no such limitations.

    8. Re:The beginning of the end? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      It's slashdot. People here think they know what everyone else should do.

      It's religion. People there think they know what everyone else should do.

      FTFY

    9. Re:The beginning of the end? by Kohath · · Score: 4, Funny

      Should every store that does not sell everything be expecting a law suit?

      This is America. Everyone should always be expecting a lawsuit.

    10. Re:The beginning of the end? by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      Isn't deciding what to sell (and what not to sell) something that every retailer does on a daily basis?

      Should every store that does not sell everything be expecting a law suit?

      There are factual differences between what Apple does and what other retailers do. If Best Buy doesn't carry something you want, you can go to Fry's or Walmart or any number of other places to get it. If Apple doesn't carry the iPhone app you want, according to Apple, you can't go to anyone else to get it either.

      In addition, retail stores have physical limitations to deal with that Apple does not. There are only so many products you can fit in a retail store, which means that each decision to carry something comes at the expense of not carrying something else. There is no practical limit on the number of applications that Apple can put in the App Store -- the only reason to refuse an application is if you flat out don't want it, rather than because you merely wanted something else more.

    11. Re:The beginning of the end? by Duradin · · Score: 1

      How does Apple prevent you from getting it from the Google App store? I know people that own both Apple and Droid products and they aren't blocked from the Google app store just because they have an Apple device.

    12. Re:The beginning of the end? by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      Sure, if you already have both an Android phone and an iPhone, but what about the substantial majority of people who don't? Are you seriously suggesting that someone should buy a second $600 phone or sign a two year contract worth $2000 in order to get a $1 app?

      Plus, even if I pay the $600 for a second phone, I still can't install whatever I want on the iPhone. What if I have an iPhone with all my stuff in it and I want an app that will export it all, but Apple rejects the app? I can't go out and buy an Android phone to run the app on because the data is in the iPhone.

    13. Re:The beginning of the end? by Dhalka226 · · Score: 2

      Isn't deciding what to sell (and what not to sell) something that every retailer does on a daily basis?

      Sure, but at the same time they shouldn't expect not to be judged by those decisions. Particularly when one of their criteria is for the products it sells to be "family-friendly" to such a degree that an app for browsing swimsuits or lingerie with models pictures is banned, but then they allow an app about "curing" homosexuality like it is a disease. If you're going to play moral policeman, expect to have the morality of your future decisions questioned.

      My personal preference would have been for Apple to say "anything other than malware goes" and stay out of the process, but that wasn't what they chose to do. They can reap whatever consequences come of that decision, as far as I'm concerned.

      Should every store that does not sell everything be expecting a law suit?

      Re-read his post. The comment about a lawsuit was if they approved an app that is used to infringe copyrights. I don't know if they would get sued for it (probably) or whether they would lose if they did (probably not), but it's hardly as if he claimed that selling or not selling this app about homosexuality is what is going to get them sued.

    14. Re:The beginning of the end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      only if its a monopoly.
      so yes, a store which refuses to supply water in an emergency where its the only store open (at a fair and reasonable price) should expect a lawsuit.
      so should apple.
      its the same problem microsoft got into trouble for.

    15. Re:The beginning of the end? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, but usually a store is not the one and only place to buy stuff, even stuff that works with a particular product.

      In the automotive industry, congress made it explicitly illegal for an auto manufacturer to void the warranty if non 'genuine' parts are used.

      A store that sets itself up as an exclusive gateway AND declares itself to be the arbiter of morality should indeed be expecting a lawsuit.

    16. Re:The beginning of the end? by Lotana · · Score: 1

      It's slashdot. People here think they know what everyone else should do.

      It's religion. People there think they know what everyone else should do.

      FTFY

      Therefore slashdot is religion.
      QED.

      Perhaps someone more creative than I can come up with Lord's Prayer that replaces "father" with "CmdTaco".

    17. Re:The beginning of the end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that this is the ONLY store you can use with apple products. So its more like the car manufacturer deciding what roads you can drive on. The tv manufacturer deciding what channels you can watch with the tv, The contact lens manufacturer deciding what books you can read while wearing their lenses.

      If apple would allow other parties to sell apps for their products, i would agree with you, then it would just be a simple matter of going to another store, but that option isnt available for apple users.

    18. Re:The beginning of the end? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, an run-of-the-mill lawsuit can be expected. But no one expects the Spanish Deposition.

  16. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by click2005 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The religious bigotry industry is much much bigger than the pro-gay or porn industry.

    --
    I am a free slashdotter. I will not be modded, blogged, DRM'd, patented, podcasted or RFID'd. My life is my own.
  17. lol by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's funny to read the same people decry Apples appstore censorship appeal to Steve Jobs to remove the app on the basis.

    Free Speech hurts doesn't it?

    1. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except it's not free speech when you censor one thing and then approve another. I don't like Apple's censorship of pornography and the like. If the platform were totally open I'd say well, nothing we can do about this but give it low ratings and ignore it. But since they censor everything else, they should censor this too. It's far more offensive than seeing some tits on your iPhone.

    2. Re:lol by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      It's funny to read the same people decry Apples appstore censorship appeal to Steve Jobs to remove the app on the basis.

      Free Speech hurts doesn't it?

      Not as much as selective free speech.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that's not what happened: Steve Jobs is already censoring like mad; there is no "free speech" in the app store. Since Jobs has made himself a censor, we should ask that he do so evenhandedly, instead of with a right wing bend.

    4. Re:lol by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      No, free speech doesn't hurt.

      That said, there is no "free speech" in the App Store, and people want Apple to at least be consistent if it's riding on the road of censorship. Why should this persons app be approved when a theoretical app just like it would likely be be denied?

      It would be better if Apple didn't censor anything and merely rejected malicious type apps, instead of pushing their personal philosophies on everyone. Sadly we don't live in that world.

    5. Re:lol by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      Apple has been pro-homosexual. They have lent their power in support of homosexual rights.

      This is hardly offensive stating only the Exodus's beliefs and their idea for solving their perceived problem.

      Just because it differs from your point of view does not make it blatantly offensive. Anyone can find even the minute thing offensive. If the world was to cater to individual's offense, then everything would be censored.

      Those who don't want the app are under no obligation to purchase it. Those who want to purchase it for whatever reason, though I find it hard to fathom, should be allowed to waste their money.

      I would say censoring porno is pushing it too, but since they want to be a family-rated site, then extreme adult material should be censored. I don't agree with Apple on that, but it's their prerogative. Just like if this was extremely sexual in nature, the LGT has the right to attack it on the adult material point of view.

    6. Re:lol by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      Apple has been pro-homosexual. They have lent their power in support of homosexual rights.
      I hardly see them as right-wing.

      Apple making this a family-rated site is not the same as this anti-homosexual app.

    7. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it doesn't hurt, but because Apple does DO free speech, which as a privet company is there right... but the very moment you go down that path, you can calim free speech at all, and admit an adrement when the rate it 'not potentially offensive'

    8. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are missing the point. Few people want them to revoke the app, most people criticizing them are focusing on the fact that they regularly censor many other areas (most notably porn). So yeah, it's "free speech" but only so long as you say what Apple approves of.

    9. Re:lol by mjwx · · Score: 2

      It's funny to read the same people decry Apples appstore censorship appeal to Steve Jobs to remove the app on the basis.

      Yeah, hypocrisy is a bitch isn't it.

      Those of us who are deriding Apple here are doing it for the same reasons. Apple are showing their hypocrisy here, first by censoring applications that they have a problem with but not censoring applications that others have a problem with. The problem is with double standards, Porn must be stopped but attacking Gay's is perfectly OK.

      Apple chose to be the moral policemen and block porn, they made their bed and now have to lie in it when someone else wets it.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    10. Re:lol by sjames · · Score: 1

      A bit, but it's not unreasonable to ask that if someone is determined to do something anyway that they at least be consistent about it.

    11. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny to read the same people decry Apples appstore censorship appeal to Steve Jobs to remove the app on the basis.

      Free Speech hurts doesn't it?

      Except, this isn't about free speech. As someone has already stated, they've blocked pornographic apps on moral and/or "won't someone please think of the children" grounds. So they're picking and choosing who gets to have free speech in their store. Gay bashing is apparently "moral" and inline with their "family-friendly" motto for their store. Unless, you're a family with two mother's or two father's.

      They wanted a walled garden, promising everyone of their customers that by giving up the freedom for anyone to sell on their platform, they would "protect" them from all the nastynasty out there. How's that working out for you right now, ye Apple faithful?

    12. Re:lol by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Hypocrisy hurts, more like.

      Apple needs to decide if it is going to limit Apps to what falls in their moral code or not, and if they do decide to censor, de facto they should be held morally accountable to those apps that they approve.

    13. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not free speech. It's arbitrary pass/fail censorship under Apple's 'moral authority'.

    14. Re:lol by pitje · · Score: 1

      erm?
      Apple censors apps. People ask Apple to censor even more apps.

      And from that, you're concluding that free speech hurts?

    15. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny to read the same people decry Apples appstore censorship appeal to Steve Jobs to remove the app on the basis.

      False equivalence much? What makes you think they are the same people?

    16. Re:lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a question of "point of view". Exodus makes medical claims, claims that are fraudulent: they cannot "cure" homosexuality. That's why the app shouldn't get approved.

      Yes, doing stupid things is Apple's prerogative (for now, until antitrust enforcement gets to them). It is our prerogative to criticize them for it.

  18. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps some one can make a "straight cure" app?

  19. Q: What's the hardest part of using an iPhone? by fivevoltforest · · Score: 0

    A: Coming out to your parents.

  20. Is there a Bigotry Cure app? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's funny how they accept this homophobic crap and not pornographic applications.

  21. No one objected to Spaghetti Day by ZipK · · Score: 1

    How come no one was on here decrying the blatant religiosity of Spaghetti Day? You don't even have to squint to see the FSM in the imagery, and I won't even mention the all-cat cast.

  22. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is why Apple should never have gone control freak and just let everyone market their app. Let the users rate them, there is no reason for apple to approve each app. They can always promote the app that provide the 'best apple experience'. I think they got in the shit they deserve. Fuck 'em!

  23. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by MoonBuggy · · Score: 2

    In the general population, depressing as it is, you are probably correct. Purchasers of trendy, high-end electronics, however, tend to skew towards the younger, richer, urban dwelling segment - even from a straightforward business perspective, this could quite easily go badly for Apple.

  24. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    Bigger than porn? What are you smoking?

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  25. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by parallel_prankster · · Score: 2

    Your last line really says it all about Apple, that is all the point in this whole post. Apple tried to act like God, now they have to deal with God-sized issues.

  26. screw em by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no one is forcing anyone to buy the app, if it don't sell it'll disappear..

  27. That's funny, I know some ex-homosexuals by Quila · · Score: 0

    I don't know any ex-blacks.

    I'm not religious, I have no "God says its bad" angle. I don't care about homosexuality, do whatever you want as long as its consensual.

    But to put a lifestyle choice on par with what blacks endured in this country is pretty sickening.

    Yes, lifestyle choice. That is how gays can be "cured" by this group, they indoctrinate you into their religion and make you believe your harmless lifestyle choice is evil. So instead of being a happy homosexual, you're now a repressed Christ-zombie.

    1. Re:That's funny, I know some ex-homosexuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What's quite sickening actually is that people still think that being gay is a lifetyle choice. Or would you say that being heterosexual is also a lifestyle choice? Lifestyle is pretty much orthogonal to sexuality or gender or race or pretty much any biological givens.

    2. Re:That's funny, I know some ex-homosexuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't know any ex-blacks.

      There is a sizeable group of people of mixed ancestry for whom identifying as Caucasian or African American is actually a choice.

    3. Re:That's funny, I know some ex-homosexuals by SpryGuy · · Score: 1

      You don't know any 'ex-gays' either. Because there is no such thing. There are only gay people who have gone back in the closet.

      Homosexuality isn't a "lifestyle choice". That's absurdly ignorant.

      And apparently you seem unaware of what gays have endured in this country and throughout history. No, it's not "the same" as what blacks went through (or jews, or any other oppressed minority), but there ARE parallels that are worth noting, and denying that is kind of ridiculous. In fact, trivializing the traumas that one minority endured just because they were different from another minority is kind of sickening.

      No gay person has ever been 'cured'. Gay is gay. Straight is straight. Bi is bi. Human sexuality is complex and varied.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    4. Re:That's funny, I know some ex-homosexuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I don't know any ex-blacks."

      Michael Jackson? Or is it too soon?

  28. Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    What's the latest word on the possible biological basis for homosexuality? I remember reading 10+ years ago about the discovery of physiological differences between the brains of Gay and Straight men, but I haven't followed the story.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      The brain cells of lesbians are similar to those of straight men; the cells of gay men are similar to those of women.

    2. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by realxmp · · Score: 1

      The brain cells of every human is pretty much identical, how they're wired is what differs. As for some fmri or similar being able to identify gayness I'm skeptical. We're only just becoming able to reliably identify major neural disorders such as autism. You might be able to pick up arousal but that's more environmental than preprogrammed (think of fetishes people have or the Victorian sexualisation of ankles). Being able to predict what makes someone fall in love? That's hard

    3. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      As for some fmri or similar being able to identify gayness I'm skeptical.

      What I read about was actually anatomical. IIRC, some tiny component of the brain was either larger or smaller.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trap reporting in! My physical status closely resembles that of a female by nature and so do my mental characteristics but I was burden/blessed with a penis. The great thing is that I'm 30 but I still look 16 and can look either sex. Am I a human platypus or is god just angry at me for being born? Will that app also tell me if an old dog of mine (he was flaming gay to the point that he knitted a scarf for himself) go to heaven? I'm guessing that very few animals go to heaven since pansexuality is the norm outside of human society.

    5. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by tomhudson · · Score: 2

      Search for 2D-4D digit ratio. The growth rates of the index and ring finger are greatly influenced by prenatal hormones, which in turn are influenced by several factors, including birth order and the fetus's genes (which can both trigger and respond to hormones).

      Testosterone usually makes the ring finger grow longer. There are ethnic variances, but generally, men's ring fingers are longer than their index fingers, gay men's ring fingers tend to be even longer (almost as long as their middle finger), and women's ring fingers tend to be shorter than their index fingers. M2F transsexuals often have the same 2D-4D digit ratio as women.

      Testosterone and estrogen have influence on the development of the brain. The 2D-4D digit ratio gives us an indirect insight into what the uterine environment was like. So yes, there is evidence that sexual preference and gender identity are both something "you're born that way", unlike the people pushing this app, who claim it's a "lifestyle preference."

    6. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      That too. If my psych-major friend ever gets online, I will ask her what part of the brain it was, because she was the one who showed me the studies they did.

    7. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      Actually, the shape of the cells is pretty different between the sexes, in general. One is kinda longer than the other, if memory serves. And one of the methods they've used for testing arousal to certain stimuli is the use of pheromones.

    8. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Thanks.

      So yes, there is evidence that sexual preference and gender identity are both something "you're born that way", unlike the people pushing this app, who claim it's a "lifestyle preference."

      The Religious Right has a real problem, because the Bible outright condemns homosexuality, and if they ever admit that it's not a personal choice, they have to admit that people can be condemned to Hell by birthright.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    9. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      I fail to see the correlation, especially since my ring finger is shorter than my index finger.

      And more testosterone makes a guy gay? By your hormonal theory, wouldn't more estrogen make a person think like a girl, and in case of guy, then be gay?

      Observations has been that more testosterone makes a person more masculine, guy or girl. And the "Casanova" (a guy who was into tons of girls) had heighten testosterone. And differing homosexuals have been shown to have both a "masculine" personality and a "feminine" personality. So the use of hormonal difference to denote sexuality is grasping at straws.

    10. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1

      Christian theology already admits this. That's the whole concept of original sin. Every human being is condemned for the supposed sins of Adam & Eve. Only when invisible sky dad sacrificed himself to himself was a loophole created. It makes complete sense! It's turtles all the way down!

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    11. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Christian theology already admits this. That's the whole concept of original sin. Every human being is condemned for the supposed sins of Adam & Eve. Only when invisible sky dad sacrificed himself to himself was a loophole created. It makes complete sense! It's turtles all the way down!

      But AFAIK all mainstream variants have always thought it was a "curable" condition - confess your sins, join the club, behave well from now on, and you're in. But no rejections on the basis of the color of your skin or eyes, short people can go to Heaven, etc.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    12. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      I fail to see the correlation, especially since my ring finger is shorter than my index finger.

      It's not possible to see a correlation on the basis of a single example.

      Observations has been that more testosterone makes a person more masculine, guy or girl.

      He was talking about hormone levels in the womb.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    13. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      So the theory is that testosterone or estrogen levels in the womb sets the gender identity and it's done with?

    14. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Rei · · Score: 2

      I fail to see the correlation, especially since my ring finger is shorter than my index finger.

      1) Do we really have to explain the difference between correlation and certainty? By your logic, you're neither male nor female, since *nobody* statistically has a shorter ring finger than index finger (men average a shorter index than ring, while women have the same size).
      2) I seriously doubt you're using the measuring protocol, which involved a flatbed scanner and many techniques to control for measuring bias and how the hand is held outstretched.

      Yes, statistically, gay men average higher testosterone levels. So do lesbians. Trans men (FTM) average significantly higher testosterone levels than cis women -- I've read around five studies on this, only one found a weak linkage, the rest found strong linkages, and one study showed an amazing half of all transmen with either PCOS or other hyperandrogenicity conditions. Trans women (MTF) do not average unusual estrogen or testosterone levels.

      Note that these are all studies on adults; this says nothing about prenatal conditions.

      Hormone levels do not seem to be the driving factor, however. The driving factor seems to lie in particular hypothalamic nuclei. As you may or may not know, the hypothalamus is a primitive structure that acts as the linkage between the brain and the endocrine system by controlling the pituitary (master) gland. There have been quite a few studies showing that it strongly affects sexuality, sexual behavior, and gender identity. INAH3 and BSTc in particular are amazingly strongly linked to gender identity. In various animal studies, inducing certain types of hypothalamic lesions has been shown to make ferrets exhibit homosexual behavior, while others have destroyed the ability for normal male copulatory behavior to occur in other lab animals.

      There are a variety of other linkages that have been shown, such as responses to aromatic sex steroids, white matter microstructure, and whatnot. At the same time, this should not be interpreted as "MTFs are born with a female brain; FTMs are born with a male brain". Most of the brain structure matches their anatomical sex. There are just a few small regions that do not. However, once hormone replacement begins, the majority brain is radically restructured (even whole-brain size) in the direction of the target sex. Most TS brain structure linkages cannot be studied by MRIs, due to their tiny sizes (they require dissection); however, the changes from hormone replacement are very measurable on MRI images.

      --
      Man on crucifix terrorizes church, demands they eat his flesh and blood. Details at 11.
    15. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      First, what part of "generally" did you miss? It's not 100%, but it's a generally accepted indicator.

      http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/readings/homofinger/homo_finger.html

      Measuring people's finger patterns may reveal some surprising information.

      Animal models have indicated that androgenic steroids acting before birth might influence the sexual orientation of adult humans. Here we examine the androgen-sensitive pattern of finger lengths, and find evidence that homosexual women are exposed to more prenatal androgen than heterosexual women are; also, men with more than one older brother, who are more likely than first-born males to be homosexual in adulthood, are exposed to more prenatal androgen than eldest sons. Prenatal androgens may therefore influence adult human sexual orientation in both sexes, and a mother's body appears to 'remember' previously carried sons, altering the fetal development of subsequent sons and increasing the likelihood of homosexuality in adulthood.

      In women, the index finger (2D, second digit) is almost the same length as the fourth digit (4D), although it may be slightly longer or shorter; in men, the index finger is more often shorter than the fourth. The greater 2D:4D ratio in females is established in two-year-olds. Because all non-gonadal somatic sex differences in humans appear to be the result of fetal androgens that masculinize males, the sex difference in the 2D:4D ratio probably reflects the prenatal influence of androgenon males.

      In an anonymous survey, 720 adults who were attending public street fairs in the San Francisco area were asked their gender, age, sexual orientation, handedness, and the number and gender of children their mother had carried before them. As expected, men have significantly longer fingers than women (P < 0.001), and we confirmed reports that the 2D:4D ratio is greater in women than it is in men.

      This sex difference in 2D:4D is greater on the right hand than on the left (Fig. 1a), indicating that the right-hand 2D:4D is more sensitive to fetal androgens than the left-hand ratio.The right-hand 2D:4D ratio of homosexual women was significantly more masculine (that is, smaller) than that of heterosexual women, and did not differ significantly from that of heterosexual men. Thus finger ratios, like otoacoustic emissions, suggest that at least some homosexual women were exposed to greater levels of fetal androgen than heterosexual women.

      2D:4D ratio of homosexual men was not significantly different from that of heterosexual men for either hand (P > 0.09). However, segregating male subjects based on birth order provided support for the role of fetal androgens in male sexual orientation. The more older brothers a boy has, the more likely he is to develop a homosexual orientation. Confirming these reports, we also found that only homosexual men had a greater than expected proportion of brothers (P< 0.01) among their older siblings (229 brothers:163 sisters) compared with the general population (106 males:100females).

      We found that the male 2D:4D ratio, which is unlikely to be influenced by social factors, also varies with the number of older brothers. The ratio was significantly more masculine in men with two or more older brothers than in men with no older brothers (Fig. 1b). There is also a significant correlation (r = -0.104; P < 0.05) between the number of older brothers and the right-hand 2D:4D ratio in men. If male subjects are divided by sexual orientation, the same pattern of later-born men displaying a more masculine 2D:4D is seen. Having older sisters has no apparent influence on male sexual orientation2, or on the 2D:4D ratio in men. No effect of older brothers or sisters on 2D:4D in women was observed, consonant with reports that older siblings exert no effect on female sexual orientation.

      Our results suggest that events before birth (or even before conception in the case

    16. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by 517714 · · Score: 1

      I searched; first result: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digit_ratio#Sexual_orientation It calls bullshit on your claims: "... most studies find no differences in digit ratio between gay and straight men" ... "Some studies correlate male homosexuality and 2D:4D positively, others negatively" Further discussion is not warranted.

      I believe one's sexual preference is genetically/prenatally influenced, but the only evidence of it is sexual orientation.

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    17. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by 517714 · · Score: 1

      All the statements you make are true. You imply that there are differences that do not exist, or have not yet been detected To clarify: the cells of gay men are similar to those of straight men are similar to those of lesbians are similar to those of straight women. To clarify further: no differences in brain cells have been found to be associated with sexual orientation.

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    18. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Well, if they can be condemned to eternal damnation by virtue of being born in someplace that has never even heard of Jesus, then I don't see a problem with them being condemned by virtue of being born preferring men to women!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    19. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by FrootLoops · · Score: 1

      The meta study that's the source behind your quote (abstract here) concludes that male sexual orientation and 2D:4D ratios are unrelated, but female sexual orientation and 2D:4D ratios are related. The GP's claims included both genders, so at least from the meta analysis some of them are plausible.

    20. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Psychology = Looking at a black box from the outside with blindfolds on and trying to deduce what is actually occurring. I haven't met a psychologist yet that actually could figure out much of anything about the human brain short of inventing new terms for "illnesses" that already existed as other things.

    21. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by 517714 · · Score: 1

      Meta analysis was used for that study. That means that the data from a number of previous studies was combined to create a statistically significant sample of almost 7000. It is not credible that a study of over 2000 would reach the opposite conclusion (that male sexual orientation is related and female is not) if the correlation were strong and data collection was consistent. Another study calls into doubt whether data obtained directly should be combined with data obtained using photocopying, I am not sure that the data was obtained in a consistent manner across these studies. I think the jury is still out.

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    22. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      The birth order can also signify a social aspect to nature/nurture argument.

      This does not prove causation either. We can just as easily say, a person with more older brothers are more likely to be homosexual because of their family situation.

      It also said that the finger ratio for homosexual men and hetero were not significantly different. It only became significantly different when birth order came into play. This does not prove causation either.

      It says it's more pronounced in female births due to hormonal abnormalities. The oppositions of LGT can argue that hormonal abnormalities can be fixed.

      Also this suggests that prenatal androgen may influence sexual orientation in both sexes.
      1. Emphasizes on the may. They're guessing, and they're researching it. It has not been conclusive yet.
      2. Research saying it's prenatal androgen influencing both sexes, kind of goes against the theory that it's prenatal testosterone causing homosexual guys and prenatal estrogen causing homosexual girls. If they want to combine the theory, that's all and good.

      I'm still not convinced and anyone who claims to be convinced by "mays" and "early research" are simply believing what they want to and looking for any hint of evidence to support them and running with it. Same behavior on both side of the debate.

    23. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      Back in the days when large families were the norm, it was well known that any family with 10 boys (yes, there were plenty of them - remember, you might have 10 boys and 10 girls, but only 6 survived childbirth and the early weeks), the last boys would always be gay. That's a pretty direct link.

      And why would we not expect there to be a biological basis for being gay or lesbian. ALL sexual behavior has a biological basis. It's not something that you need to learn, it's instinctive. Did you have to learn to be horny? Did you have to learn that certain sights and sounds should float your boat, turn your crank, or whatever? Did you have to learn that you should experience sexual attraction to someone?

      Of course not! All these behaviors have a biological basis for straight people. Why should it be any different for gays and lesbians?

    24. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Out of karma posts.

      You may not need to learn to be gay.

      But things like environment, especially family situation can cause depression, low self esteem, rage, rebellious behavior, promiscuity, aggressiveness, etc.

      Haven't we always spouted rhetoric about "cycles of abuse" and all that stuff?

      Why couldn't being pushed to be attracted to same-sex or maybe being different be a symptom of being the youngest child. There's all sort of rhetoric about if you're the oldest, you're likely to be like this. If you're middle child, you're likely to be like that. If you're youngest, you're likely to be spoiled. This is just another rhetoric to add, if you're youngest, you're likely to be gay.

      Addictive personality. Is that biological or learned? If it is biological, and you're never exposed to alcohol or gambling or something else. Do you still have an alcoholic or gambling problem?

    25. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by ikarous · · Score: 1

      That too. If my psych-major friend ever gets online, I will ask her what part of the brain it was, because she was the one who showed me the studies they did.

      You are thinking of the corpus callosum, the bridge linking the left and right hemispheres of the brain.

    26. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      I think that may have been it, actually.

    27. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      But AFAIK all mainstream variants have always thought it was a "curable" condition - confess your sins, join the club, behave well from now on, and you're in. But no rejections on the basis of the color of your skin or eyes, short people can go to Heaven, etc.

      You can't cure sin, you can only try not to sin and ask for absolution when you've sinned.

      So the official Christian response is "yes, those men are homosexual, but that doesn't mean they have to have to have sex with men. They can just have sex with women and raise a family, suppress those urges, and ask for forgiveness for sinful desires."

      Sucks.

    28. Re:Biological basis for Teh Gay? by realxmp · · Score: 1

      As for some fmri or similar being able to identify gayness I'm skeptical.

      What I read about was actually anatomical. IIRC, some tiny component of the brain was either larger or smaller.

      You actually got me curious about this so I looked up the paper. I assume you're talking about pubmed article:17975723. Unfortunately that study has a sample size of 22, 12 cases and 10 controls so I'm calling underpowered study on that one. Actually the authors called it "The participants in the present study were stringently selected and the groups were carefully matched, but the results are limited due to low power", they also said "It is noted that because our ratio of number of observations to predictors was low, there is increased likelihood of chance findings with this analysis". I also don't see any citations indicating there was a successful larger sample. What you see there is a pilot study, but no followup so I really would be cautious about drawing conclusions from it.

  29. you can be sure of one thing though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that App will look FABULOUS with your chiffon iPhone cover

  30. Now I'm no homophobe... by supersloshy · · Score: 1, Troll

    ...But I think this app deserves to stay. Why? Because homosexuality is nothing more than a preference, a preference that some people clearly don't like. You can't force people to not download the app because you disagree with it's position. That's the whole point of free speech. IF the people who approve of homosexuality don't like the app, just don't download it! It's that simple! You can't force people to subscribe to your view of the world by making them approve of homosexuality, and likewise you can't prevent people from disagreeing.

    In a completely unrelated point, I find homosexuality disgusting for various reasons; plus, I'm a Catholic and have religious beliefs about sexuality. That has nothing to do with my opinion of the application though (I don't plan on downloading it), so please don't respond criticizing my beliefs and preferences.

    --
    "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    1. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by egranlund · · Score: 1

      I personally think we need an app to cure heterosexual people.
      I find their preference to be straight disgusting.

    2. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In a completely unrelated point, I find homosexuality disgusting for various reasons; plus, I'm a Catholic and have religious beliefs about sexuality. That has nothing to do with my opinion of the application though (I don't plan on downloading it),

      1. It doesn't sound like a "completely unrelated point" to me ...
      2. You come across as a "the gentleman doth protest too much" type. Repressing?

      As for your prior claim:

      Because homosexuality is nothing more than a preference, a preference that some people clearly don't like

      Do you have any proof that sexuality of any sort is a "preference"? Did you wake up one day and decide that you were going to be a straight sexually-repressed Catholic? Or did you become straight because Jesus, the Bible, or someone else told you it was the "right thing to do and you should put away those shameful lusts?

      Or did you instead just realize that you instinctively preferred partners of the opposite sex? Same as gays and lesbians realize it despite all the social pressure to deny it?

      IF the people who approve of homosexuality don't like the app, just don't download it! It's that simple!

      ... so please don't respond criticizing my beliefs and preferences.

      If you don't want people criticizing your bigoty, JUST DON'T POST! It's that simple!

      But since you put it out there, let's see some proof of your claim that heterosexuality, homosexuality, lesbianism, transsexuality, etc., are "nothing more than a preference."

    3. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except by your statements you are obviously a homophobe ...

    4. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by digitallife · · Score: 1

      Homosexuality is a preference like heterosexuality is a preference. If you think you could choose to change your sexual preference, then I suppose it's fair to expect the same of others.

        So, do you?

    5. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by arekusu_ou · · Score: 0

      I would mod you up but oddly I don't have any mod points anymore. Must be the idleness.

      I have no problem with homosexuality, but this exactly is one of the main reason why I hate the LGT lobbyist and Vegan lobbyists. It's one thing to have their own perspective, that I can respect. They can even denounce and be vapid about the opposition view, that is their right. But for the LGT to try and force their views on the rest of the population is blatant hypocrisy. They are just as bad as those who they decry.

      The LGT "believes" that being homosexual is unavoidably biological, and they're free to have their belief.
      The conservatives "believes" that being homosexual is a conscious choice and they have a problem with that choice, and they're free to have their belief too.

      I don't have a better label for opposition of LGT's without looking confusing.

      If the LGT adamantly opposes the conservatives from aggressively silencing the LGT's voice, then the LGT has no right to aggressively silence the conservatives' voice.

      I'm agnostic and do not support the Catholic Church, but short of them dragging people off to religious indoctrination (kidnapping) or forcible sexual-preference conversion (rape), they have their right to their beliefs. My only problem is my tax dollars supporting the Christian mission that does not involve humanitarian aid. That or my tax dollars pushing Catholic fallacy like "abstinence only".

      Now of course my opposition to "teaching" Creationism in "mandatory schools" paid by "tax dollars" as "Science" to replace "legitimate" science is a different issue, and not a reflection on silencing the Creationists.

    6. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " I'm a Catholic and have religious beliefs about sexuality. That has nothing to do with my opinion of the application though (I don't plan on downloading it), so please don't respond criticizing my beliefs and preferences."

      What if we find your beliefs to be offensive? I would no more bite my tongue to assuage a Catholic then I would a member of the KKK. Both organizations are unequivocally evil and should be decried at every opportunity.

    7. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by robco74 · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry but fighting for my right to be treated equally under the law isn't trying to force my views on the rest of the population. I'm not trying to recruit anyone. If you're hetero and happy, I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with being discriminated against. Homophobia has no place in government policy. We're finally phasing out DADT, now we can work on getting rid of DOMA and passing ENDA. Believe it or not, but most of us LGBTs would be happy to live our lives in peace and not raise a fuss. But the religious right won't allow that.

      As for being a mere preference, the overwhelming majority of psychologists and psychiatrists consider sexual orientation to go well beyond simple preference. Nor does research show that sexual orientation is mutable. People have the right to their beliefs, but only over their own lives. Those beliefs should be allowed to be challenged by things like oh, facts. Nor should irrational belief be the basis for public policy. And that's where you completely miss the point. One side has only belief and not one shred of credible evidence to back up their view. Hint - it's not the LGBTs.

    8. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      Do you have any proof that homosexuality is not a preference? Because I haven't seen science offer any evidence yet.

      And before you add, I don't support the Catholic views and their repressive beliefs.

    9. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Rockoon · · Score: 0

      Do you have any proof that sexuality of any sort is a "preference"?

      ..so pedophiles dont have a choice?

      I wonder if when discussing pedophilia that you are so "open minded", or if on the other hand, you say things like "they should be castrated" and "lock them up in pound-em-in-the-ass prison" Sexual preference (aka simple attraction) does not define sexual behavior. Someone who goes both ways is bi-sexual, even if they "prefer" one sex over the other.

      This "homosexual" word defines behavior, not preference..
      ..just like "pedophile" defines behavior, not preference.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    10. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      These people believe that when the ancient romans were having lots of same-sex sex, that it "wasn't their choice." Apparently an entire culture spontaneously became homosexual and it wasn't of their free will to do so.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    11. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      Believe it or not, I agree with the DADT having no place in Government policy.
      Or that any beliefs should have a basis for public policy, irrational or rational. Public policy should be based on rational decisions and logic, not beliefs of a majority or minority, especially in a democracy.
      I have mixed feelings about DOMA but that has nothing to do with this either.

      This has nothing to do with government policy. This is about an organization's right to throw out their beliefs in the form of an app that other believers can pay for.

      Neither does the LGBT have any credible evidence to back up their beliefs either.

      This app is not trying to force the LGBT into anything. This app is to appeal to their believers and the LGBT is making a fuss over it. The opposition have a right to their bigot message. This app doesn't force the LGBT community to the opposition's views. It MAY inflame the opposition to convert the LGBT but the LGBT has done their share of trying to convert people into thinking homosexuality is biological and not preference.

    12. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by robco74 · · Score: 1

      Most of the credible research being conducted is showing that there is a biological component to sexual orientation. Most mental health professionals agree that "reparative therapy" to change sexual orientation is harmful. This isn't just a conflict of beliefs, it is very much like the creationism vs evolution debate - one side has things like facts and research, the other side has an irrational belief system with absolutely zero credible evidence supporting it. That's a huge difference.

      I'm torn because I don't think they should be censored. But I have every right to point out the fact that they're sexist, egotistical, lying, hypocritical bigots.

      The point is that discrimination based on sexual orientation hasn't yet become as distasteful as other forms of discrimination. Would you be supporting a KKK app? How about one explaining how women are inferior? Or how about one explaining how Jews are the cause of our problems and offering up a ministry to convert them? No? But with sexual orientation, the issue is still "debatable" even though there's nothing but pseudoscience and junk science supporting it. Give me a break.

    13. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      1. Download the app on homophobe's iPhone when they're not looking
      2. Ask to borrow phone when others are around
      3. "Hey, I didn't know you were gay!"

    14. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The LGT "believes" that being homosexual is unavoidably biological, and they're free to have their belief.

      No, the LGBT community KNOWS this, because they live it. And science is on their side. As is all available evidence.

      The conservatives "believes" that being homosexual is a conscious choice and they have a problem with that choice, and they're free to have their belief too.

      The conservatives are factually wrong, have no evidence to support their view, and in fact choose this 'belief' in order to excuse their hateful ignorant bigotry and their "right" to oppress and demonize a minority.

      I hope this clears a few things up for you.

    15. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      Depends what the KKK app does. If the KKK app spouts nonsense about white supremacy and why they should not be minority-sympathizers, then yeah, I'd say to allow it, because it's their right as expressed by the society.

      There are things out there that claim why men or women are inferior, and I think they have a right too exist too.

      And I think anti-semantic taglines should be admissible as well.

      Reparative therapy is a tool, and like any tool can be harmful or helpful. Reparative therapy techniques have been used in legitimate physiological therapy.

      Visualization? Social Skills Training? Therapy? Interventions?

      The big thing that comes to mind is all the effort dumped into the Autistic.

      It's all a matter of perspective.

      I have yet to see any credible research make a solid determination as to homosexuality being biological. The hormone difference is contradictory to itself. And there have been no evidence like evolution's evidence.
      And in light of that, and even despite any future credible research, people should still have their right to their bigoted views. They should only be restricted on their actions that act upon others.

      You have your right to say those things too, and I agree with your view that they are "sexist, egotistical, hypocritical bigots". But this isn't about the greater fight of LGT, this is about their right to an app.

    16. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm going to murder you, too. You're a piece of shit, and if I ever see you in person you are going to suffer the most excrutiating, pain-wracked deaths possible.

    17. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Do you have any proof that homosexuality is not a preference? Because I haven't seen science offer any evidence yet.

      And before you add, I don't support the Catholic views and their repressive beliefs.

      http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/readings/homofinger/homo_finger.html

    18. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      If homosexuality is a conscious choice, it follows that heterosexuality is also a conscious choice. Now, I'm straight, and I'm pretty sure there is no way I could choose to be homosexual. There is pretty much no way I could choose to have sex with another man -- they simply don't turn me on. (I'm not even that disgusted by gay porn; it simply doesn't do anything for me.)

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    19. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Live and let live. The disgusting acts performed by heterosexual couples are actually necessary for the perpetuation of the species.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    20. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Homosexuality is only a "preference" for bisexuals.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    21. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      Uh. No. Homosexual defines preference by definition -- it is sexual attraction to someone of the same sex, NOT the act of having sex with that person. Similarly, pedophile defines preference, NOT behavior; a person can be a pedophile without ever touching a kid.

    22. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      Actually, that was due to cultural pressure to engage in gay sex, much like gays now are pressured into sublimating their urges into something "acceptable".

    23. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      I don't believe people who go around for decades sexually abusing dozens of kids "have a choice" - there's something fundamentally "not right" upstairs, which is why they are dangerous, incurable, and the Catholic Church's position of moving them from place to place and thinking that they can "pray it away" has been so disastrous, with repeat offenders in multiple parishes.

    24. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      "Because homosexuality is nothing more than a preference"

      Wrong. The rest of your post is irrelevant

    25. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      That's not proof, that's supposition. The other side makes suppositions too.

    26. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      That's not proof, that's supposition. The other side makes suppositions too.

      It's published, peer-reviewed research, which is a heck of a lot better than what the other side offers :-)

    27. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by arekusu_ou · · Score: 1

      I'm open to that being a conscious choice.

      Just because someone is a caffeine addict, with a biological urge to consume caffeine at 500 mg a day, doesn't mean they can't make a conscious choice not to consume caffeine at such an insane rate. It's called self control and impulse control.

      Society already criticizes people on lack of impulse control for all kinds of things.

    28. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Out of karma posts heh.

      Research that uses words like "may" in 2000 with no proof of conclusion in 2011 does not exactly ring endorse causation.

      And that blurb about 2D-4D and a survey on people with finger measurements, birth order, and sexual orientation does not equate in depth research proving causation.

      And Nature magazine and Newsweek as peer reviewed proof? Really? I'm not in the field but I would think they have something a bit more stringent than Nature magazine. I think my doctor had a subscription of Nature in the waiting room.

      I'm not convinced

    29. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Out of karma posts heh.

      I have 15 mod points. Instead of using them here, >I'm posting. What's your point?

      Research that uses words like "may" in 2000 with no proof of conclusion in 2011

      The research was written in 2000. You're free to search for other research, or even do your own.

      The authors credentials are: TERRANCE J. WILLIAMS, MICHELLE E. PEPITONE, SCOTT E. CHRISTENSEN, BRADLEY M. COOKE, ANDREW D. HUBERMAN, NICHOLAS J. BREEDLOVE, TESSA J. BREEDLOVE, CYNTHIA L. JORDAN & S. MARC BREEDLOVE

      Department of Psychology and Graduate Groups Neuroscience, Endocrinology, 3210 Tolman Hall, MC 1650, University of California , Berkeley, California 94720-1650, USA

      That they published in Nature is fine. What next, say that if someone publishes in Scientific American it's no good because SciAm is "pop science"?

    30. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, people are capable of making a conscious choice not to engage in specific sex acts, regardless of whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. But I don't believe they are capable of making a conscious choice to not be attracted to someone. And yes, to a certain extent sexual response is learned behavior, but not to the extent of whether you prefer men or women.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    31. Re:Now I'm no homophobe... by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      Do you have any proof that homosexuality is not a preference? Because I haven't seen science offer any evidence yet.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
  31. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 2

    In the general population, depressing as it is, you are probably correct. Purchasers of trendy, high-end electronics, however, tend to skew towards the younger, richer, urban dwelling segment - even from a straightforward business perspective, this could quite easily go badly for Apple.

    The real kicker is this -- Apple regularly rejects politically-sensitive apps, including a bunch of anti-Bush apps that people made during the last years of his presidency. One of the authors emailed The Steve about it. Jobs responded:

    Even though my personal political leanings are democratic, I think this app will be offensive to roughly half our customers. What’s the point?
            Steve

  32. Re:Oh come on. tsarkon reports by St.Creed · · Score: 1

    I think you forgot to take your pills today. Seriously.

    --
    Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
  33. unproven medical treatment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The problem with this app is not that it attempts to turn homosexuals into heterosexuals; if it could actually do that, great.

    The problem is that Exodus makes unproven, misleading, and at times patently false medical claims. If Apple accepts this, they should accept any unlicensed, unproven medical treatment into the app store.

  34. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by j+h+woodyatt · · Score: 1

    > ...If Apple rejects this app, they'll be attacked for infringing on free speech, supporting a particular political agenda...

    Apple did that when they decided not to accept sexually explicit material.

    --
    jhw
  35. what a laff by pbjones · · Score: 1

    Apple has historically faced anti-religion, pro-gay accusations in the past, selling the Apple I for $666.66 and the (gay) rainbow colours of the Apple Logo, and for using an apple (a traditional sign of temptation) and now that it passes an pro-hetro app for iTunes together with other soft porn apps, the tables seem to have turned. Ok, so now the gay lobby will want the Bible removed from ITunes too? The Bible says that gay behaviour is disgusting, along with a number of other things relating to heterosexuality, and not to forget, lying, cheating and stealing.

    --
    There was an unknown error in the submission.
    1. Re:what a laff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're trying to make a joke, but the Bible already violates Apple's anti-pornography and anti-violence terms, and it remains available in apps simply because nobody would dare challenge the religious lobby on this.

  36. Should be installed by default! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should be installed by default on all apple devices!

  37. Oh well. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

    Censorship is idiotic. I see no real reason that they shouldn't accept it, despite the fact that I heavily disagree with their message.

    --
    Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    1. Re:Oh well. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, I guess we should just continue to let gay people be marginalized and downtrodden. So they consistently identify as hating their lives due to society's opinions of them. So they have high rates of depression, drug use, and suicide. Who cares, it's really important that a bunch of bigots be allowed to have an iPhone app. It's such a shame that people don't want to hear their disgusting message. Those fundies sure are the victims here.

    2. Re:Oh well. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Okay, I guess we should just continue to let gay people be marginalized and downtrodden.

      If it's only by speech, then yes. There's such a thing as "freedom of speech," you know. That doesn't mean "speech that I approve of." It means "freedom of speech."

      So they consistently identify as hating their lives due to society's opinions of them.

      This is why I always say that people need to get rid of illogical emotions such as anger or sadness, especially in situations such as these. Who cares if someone doesn't like you or approve of what you do for illogical reasons? If you see nothing wrong, then there is likely no problem. Analyze what they say logically, not emotionally, and if it doesn't make logical sense, dismiss it and cease caring. They are just words. They are nothing else. You are only hurt because you let yourself be hurt, and letting yourself be hurt by something so petty is illogical and counterproductive. If they kill themselves over it, it is their own fault.

      I'm guessing that most of society fails to obtain this mindset. It is a shame, really. They waste their time worrying about pointless words whilst claiming that humans are an intelligent species.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    3. Re:Oh well. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      beep boop i'm a robot. >uninstall emotions

      Come down from your tower.

    4. Re:Oh well. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Tower? That is a poor assumption, but I believe myself to be speaking logically. Do you need to be hurt by words? Is it not you that lets yourself be hurt by words? Is it not counterproductive and illogical to let yourself be hurt by such petty things?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    5. Re:Oh well. by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      Words are not petty. Language is not irrelevant. It is the primary form of communication for our species, and to suggest that you are unaffected by it is to be disingenuous in the extreme.

      If we are to have meaningful relationships with other members of our species, then we must of necessity allow ourselves to be "hurt by words".

    6. Re:Oh well. by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Words are petty. They are nothing in the grand scheme of things. You'll be dead, and so will everyone else. Their opinion can only affect you if you let their opinion affect you, and in cases where they are just trying to insult you, letting it affect you is counterproductive.

      Language is not irrelevant.

      We ourselves are irrelevant and useless. Such things are only important to us (most of us).

      and to suggest that you are unaffected by it is to be disingenuous in the extreme.

      What do you mean? It becomes easy once you realize how pointless everything is and how equally pointless getting offended by mere words is. I just don't care.

      If we are to have meaningful relationships with other members of our species, then we must of necessity allow ourselves to be "hurt by words".

      I fail to see why you must be hurt by mere words in order to have "meaningful" (if someone actually wants that) relationships. If someone is merely trying to insult you and is speaking illogically, what good would that do? It would hurt emotionally and distract you, wasting your time.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    7. Re:Oh well. by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      I just don't care.

      Ok. Good on you. I do, which I guess is my problem.

  38. iBi by incubbus13 · · Score: 1

    At this rate, they should have an app out by next year to make my girlfriend bi...

    K.

    1. Re:iBi by 517714 · · Score: 1

      Blowup dolls can do that?

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
  39. Ok. by John+Hasler · · Score: 2

    Now, they are going to accept the "Christian Cure" app as well, of course...

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:Ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      awww someone get their ass in a twist?

    2. Re:Ok. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also predict an app called Islamic cure, the Hindu cure, the Jew cure... But you won't find is a Pastafarian cure app.

  40. Apple started this by Arancaytar · · Score: 2

    If they hadn't assigned themselves the rule of censor, nobody would complain about this. The app would still be offensive, but Apple would be assigned no blame for allowing its distribution. It would be held up as an example of universal freedom of speech.

    Having decided to act as the official nanny of every Apple customer, though, they are fully responsible for the shit they let through, too. Don't let them off the hook for this.

  41. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by hodma727 · · Score: 1

    Apple accepts this app and they're attacked for being anti-gay, supporting homophobia, etc... If Apple rejects this app, they'll be attacked for infringing on free speech, supporting a particular political agenda, etc... Either way, you're pissing customers off.

    But all I feel is schadenfreude. They got themselves into this mess by imposing editorial control over the iPhone in the first place. They made their bed, now they get to lie in it.

    Meh. What mess? This is called free advertising...

  42. Here comes apple douchebag fanboi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can you be a bigger sucker of apple? They have already suppressed countless "free speech" apps, you asshole.

  43. You still have to choose to download it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the target audience has no reason to download it and use it why are we worried about it? It'd be like building an app for the Amish.

    It's an application without a market, everyone who has downloaded it thus far are most likely just lookey-loos who read one of these articles. Stop caring about it and it'll go away. I can guarantee you that tomorrow both homosexuals and right-wing Christians will still be buying the iPhone regardless of the decision that gets made. In fact because of the press most likely more people will be buying them, go figure, we humans are silly creatures.

    1. Re:You still have to choose to download it by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      It'd be like building an app for the Amish.

      Has this site gone out of business yet?

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  44. You can't... but they try by acomj · · Score: 1

    Being gay isn't anything that can be cured. Based on the gay people I know it seems to make life so much more significantly difficult (even in Massachusetts) that the fact that anyone would "choose" it seems patently absurd. You are what you are.

        I know of two cases where a guy who was married turned out to be gay (after having kids in one case) . Its pretty hard on everyone when that happens and comes out (no pun intended) due to an affair. In both cases there was a lot of religion involved which may or may not have played a role.

    In the Bill Mahr movie "Religulous" which was ok, had an interesting scene where he visits someone who runs one of these "turn people straight" organizations, so there are people like that out there.

    I think apple needs to rethink its app store model.

    1. Re:You can't... but they try by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Being gay isn't anything that can be cured. Based on the gay people I know it seems to make life so much more significantly difficult (even in Massachusetts) that the fact that anyone would "choose" it seems patently absurd. You are what you are.

      On talk.origins, whenever some guy would start posting his view that it was a matter of choice, the biologists would ask him when he decided he was going to prefer females.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  45. Apple, thank you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    another reason to not become a customer of yours.

    cb

  46. God Bashing App? by VirginMary · · Score: 2

    Does it depend on which god? People believe in so many different ones! Also, why would it matter to bash some imaginary entity or entities? What about a Santa Claus bashing app?

    --
    When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
    1. Re:God Bashing App? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a separate instance of god for each believer.

    2. Re:God Bashing App? by VirginMary · · Score: 1

      There is a separate instance of god for each believer.

      Only too true!

      --
      When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
  47. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by hedwards · · Score: 1

    There's two issues, one that they allowed it into the Appstore when they've banned many apps for less. The second issue is that they gave it a rating which implies that it's OK for everybody, rather than deeply offensive to a substantial group of people. They could've given it a more appropriate rating, as in for adults only, but they opted to give it the equivalent of a "G" rating.

    That's my understanding of the 4 stars they gave it, I don't have an iPhone so I'm not positive if the summary is correct.

  48. DEV INVADERS - Game App Chronicals Developer Whoas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DEV INVADERS - iPhone Game App

    An alien invasion game for iOS Developers.

    Shoot developer Enemies down as you try to get your App in the App Store!

    Have a 'blast' fighting your way through 6 levels of Enemy Code Errors, Bad Code Signing, 2.12 Rejections, Firmware Updates and Many More!

    Hit Bonus items for extra lives and weapon upgrades.

    DEV INVADERS will bring a smile to anyone. A MUST for any iPhone Developer!!

    Tilt iPhone Left and Right to move. Tap Screen to shoot.

  49. If it isn't lifestyle, then you have a problem by Quila · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Then it can be "corrected" for eventually, the genetic anomaly eliminated.

    That's why a lot of gays don't subscribe to the "born that way" theory.

    Heterosexuality is natural, propagation of the species and all. Other choices, including asexuality, aren't natural. But then many things we do out of choice aren't natural, so homosexuality isn't special in any regard on that front.

    1. Re:If it isn't lifestyle, then you have a problem by xehonk · · Score: 1

      So animals make life-style choices too?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

    2. Re:If it isn't lifestyle, then you have a problem by mewshi_nya · · Score: 1

      Uh, you do realize that most gays actually *do* subscribe to the "born that way" theory, right? And that it's not based on there being some "gay gene" or something, right?

    3. Re:If it isn't lifestyle, then you have a problem by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Homosexual trait appears to increase reproductive success of a group, in humans. For one, sisters (and their offspring) of homosexual men end up significantly more fertile.

      Well, being uncomfortable with anything which can upset your simple ancient answers to the questions is also natural...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  50. Hypocrisy abound... by Therilith · · Score: 1

    To all the people trying to get this app banned: Fuck you.

    No, I'm not even going to bother posting AC.

    Fuck you for trying to censor someone else's opinion, no matter how offensive or batshit insane.

    1. Re:Hypocrisy abound... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you, too, you little punk bitch.

    2. Re:Hypocrisy abound... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      According to the Supreme Court, the Westboro Baptist Church has the right to picket funerals with signs that read "God Hates Fags". Since this app is slightly less offensive, yes it can be considered free speech as well, despite the fact that I and many other consider it offensive and repugnant.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  51. In defence of Exodos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone who has met the leader of this organization, my impressions have been that this organization is not oppressive or evil. The only offensive part of it is that they care about the individual's wellbeing more than not offending people.

  52. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    Apple imposes a certain degree of editorial control, but they also allow a lot of things in their apps. I get a click-through warning about 'adult content' every time the App Store wants to update my Craigs List apps, for example.

  53. I'm going to download it by BLToday · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm going to download it so I can write a review. Here's the preview:

    "**** awesome app. I was blowing random dudes at gas stations but after 3 days of using this app I'm down to finding Justin Bieber attractive. With constant use, I hope by next week I'll like boobs."

    1. Re:I'm going to download it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget to give it 4 out of 5 erect penises!

  54. Gay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a conversation with a friend about people who are gay. We agreed it's natures way of letting us know that humanity has run its course. Good riddance, this species is so sick, mankind is general is sick, the planet is sick. Maybe Gaia is sending a message. How fucked up can you be really? Gayness is a self destruction mechanism.

    1. Re:Gay by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Or maybe having a small percentage of the population remain non-breeders is actually a survival factor for the species. It's not like homosexuality is a new development in human behavior, or even that it is confined to just the human species. 2000 years ago the long time success of a tribe was largely determined by it's birth rate, so anything that might lower the birth rate was strongly discouraged. That is no longer the case, hence the lessoning of the taboos against homosexual behavior. (Sparta is a case in point. 3000 years ago they had a culture wherein homosexuality was considered normal. However, they eventually declined as a city because their birth rate was too low.)

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  55. The missing info by theBully · · Score: 0

    The article fails to mention that the app comes with a rope and soap for Texas buyers. Just in case of a software bug.

    1. Re:The missing info by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Dude, it's called "soap-on-a-rope", the soap of choice for navy men the world over!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  56. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by sznupi · · Score: 1

    What is the highest / most prominent / most expensive / etc. building in most human settlements?

    (that said, there's also the possibility of religious bigotry gay porn... ;> )

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  57. Unintended consequences by Tjp($)pjT · · Score: 2

    If Apple (where Tim Cook, interim leader of Apple, has been outed as gay) removes this App for gay bashing, then all the religious apps will need to be removed to satisfy the atheists, "sexy" male oriented apps removed for the feminists and vice versa (although straight males seem to have an attachment to lesbian sexuality), and so on until the PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals, oh no, the first amendment died that day and that other PETA won in court), well those guys demand all the animal cruelty Apps be removed (i.e., it has an animal image therefore encourages animal exploitation. So no more Penguin Catapult or Angry Birds will remain. All in All after everyone is done objecting the Apple "App Store"(tm) will look as barren as the Microsoft Windows Phone 7 phone Applet Market.

    Stop the political correctness overreaching because they're well beyond the point of affecting my individual rights. It is equal protection under the law, not the orwellian equal protection for all but some are more equal than others ...

    --
    - Tjp

    I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!

    1. Re:Unintended consequences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get this: some opinions based in falsities and pseudoscience are actually wrong and should be discouraged instead of being allowed to continue. It's not "political correctness", it's just "correctness".

      Funny idea, I know.

  58. Ye ol' Techno Gay, not Modern Lamefag-gay. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Think about it. At the operating Table where Steve Jobs is about to choose what Liver transplant will arrive, the doctor wearing a Crucifix gives him a choice;

    Mr. Jobs, you have 5 choices and you can only choose two, and they are:
    A) Liver Transplant from a raging Homosexual who ate Garlic the last moment of life while participating in a mass orgy of unknown multiple Partners around the whole fucking globe,
    B) This plate of Kosher food as you donate your few remaining good organs to be received by a dying Jewish child in the next room,
    C) Liver Transplant from this French Christian woman that died in a recent race-riot in Compton where she was brutally murdered,
    D) Garlic and Stake with a cup of blessed Water,
    E) Kandy and moar LSD!

    Do you know what that Son of a Bitch would pick?
    JOBS: I HATE GARLIC, DON"T MENTION STEAK AROUND MEEE, and all these lights TURN THEM OFF, and I HATE YOUR CRUCIFIX, give me the blood of that French lady and lay her body on mine while the operation goes; that relative of mine down the hall, tell him that him and his father worked together and that he doesn't have a chance of inheriting his family's gold fortune as long as I'm still alive.
    DOCTOR: somehow you still have two choices, and I don't know where choice E went to so we can't offer than anymore...

    1. Re:Ye ol' Techno Gay, not Modern Lamefag-gay. by slackbheep · · Score: 1

      Wut?

  59. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by sznupi · · Score: 1

    I would be surprised. If anything, you can expect some silly (but working, easily offsetting sales losses) movement by religious bigots to "support a righteous company"...

    (plus - suddenly iOS products aren't widely successful? ;) Also - I'm not sure if "richer" is a big part, not when contract / living off credit hides cost of a (sort of) positional goods)

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  60. Steve Jobs is going to die by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to hunt down and murder Steve Jobs if he doesn't call for this app to be removed and personally apologize for approving this app. Come and get me!

    1. Re:Steve Jobs is going to die by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Ignorant and unenlightened behavior should be responded to by education. not violence.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  61. Tough one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While I don't personally believe that being gay is a choice, I can't prove it's not. So how can I judge people who go looking for a "cure", if that's what they really want?

  62. Re: I agree with your point... by grizzifus · · Score: 1

    ...(assuming the app doesn't unfairly vilify homosexuality), but I don't know why you felt it would be helpful to include a "completely unrelated point" about you finding homosexuality disgusting (for various undisclosed reasons). The Catholic Church hasn't exactly been a shining light in terms of sex and gender (particularly in regard to the rape of children, and ensuring the swift and effective prosecution of such rapists by secular authorities). Also women in the clergy?, Contraception? And of course homosexuality. If you don't like the idea of having your Catholic Church inspired, backwards beliefs about sexuality criticized, then how about you don't add them to the discussion.

    In a completely unrelated point, I find the Catholic Church's dogma to be disgusting for various reasons; plus I'm an Atheist and have moral beliefs about religious dogma. That has nothing to do with my opinion of your comment though, so please don't respond criticizing my beliefs and preferences.

  63. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why bother? You'd just they "came out of the closet and were always gay". All I've seen in this conversation is bunch of homosexuals peddling the No True Scotsman fallacy.

  64. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A quick Google search reveals that the US porn industry rakes in somewhere between 10 and 20 billion dollars a year depending on which source you prefer.

    Donations to religious groups in the US alone amount to over 100 billion dollars per year. And that doesn't include the sales of tens of millions of Bibles, and hundreds of millions of religious books, CDs, movies, etc.

  65. Re:Walled Gardens by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    We might have a real Ouroboros going on here.

    Is it remotely possible that what goes on in the Premier App Store of the country then becomes a microcosm of what the country "decides it is thinking"? I'm not good enough at the math to do this next bit, but as a fast & rough theory, we're starting to get a Walled Garden set of laws. See that new law floating around Congress about Felonies for unauthorized streaming etc... with that level of hyperbole, I'm absolutely sure there can be a Rated G rider in it or following it that Hate Speech leads to Discontent and Discontent breeds Terrorism and therefore Hate Speech is a threat to National Security.

    So what they do with the app can be spun into talk debates on both outcomes. If they allow it, they "support the Right Wing agenda", if they ban it, it is "Apple over-controlling the software-consumer interface" and more.

    All of these partial examples are building into deep social pressure that is going to overflow soon.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  66. Boycott! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    I for my part wil boycott this App!

    Wow, I feel relieved now.

    angel'o'sphere

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    1. Re:Boycott! by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      So you're planning on remaining just the way you are? So am I... I plan on remaining straight, and I seriously doubt any iPhone app could change that!

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:Boycott! by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      I for my part wil boycott this App!

      There's probably another app that will make you quit using it.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  67. Straight Cure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Someone should counter by creating an app that aims to make heterosexual people become gay.

    So long as it lacks explicit material it should be allowed, by the very same logic that 'Gay Cure' is allowed.

    1. Re:Straight Cure by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Someone should counter by creating an app that aims to make heterosexual people become gay.
      As a heterosexual, I have no issue with that. Don't expect me to buy it. Of course, I have never bought an app in my life and never will, but I even more so would not buy a "heterosexual cure" app, just as a homosexual probably would not buy a "gay cure" app.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    2. Re:Straight Cure by DamienNightbane · · Score: 1, Funny

      They already have those. They're called "iTunes", "iOS", and "OSX".

    3. Re:Straight Cure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like this?

  68. Exodus International by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is not "anti-gay." Instead, it has merely proven wrong the unproven claims of homosexuals that, "God made me this way and I can't change." All the noise is folks not wanting someone showing where they've been wrong, that's all. Human beings can do what they want, but shouldn't lie about it.
    Not "born" this way but CHOSE this way.

    1. Re:Exodus International by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      God made me straight. Do you think anyone can change that, no matter how hard they try? Sexual preference is just like handedness. Most people are right handed, some people are left handed and some people are ambidextrous. Does EI also think they can retrain left handed people to be right handed? I think they can only retrain ambidextrous people to prefer to use their right hand.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  69. This really isn't free speech... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    If Apple rejects this app, they'll be attacked for infringing on free speech

    Apple is not the only avenue one could use for spreading homophobia. The same group could not expect to be able to run an ad for their "services" in OUT magazine; and for that matter it may even be rejected by publications who are overall neutral on the matter. If Apple doesn't allow the app to be sold, it doesn't stop the message or suppress their right to spread it.

    That said, if Apple wants to be seen as open to a variety of viewpoints then it is likely in their best interest to sell it. But there is no reason why they have to allow it. They are, in the end, a publisher. If you write a pro-KKK letter to your local newspaper they are not required to publish it if they prefer not to.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:This really isn't free speech... by Froggels · · Score: 0

      But Apple doesn't own the hardware that people purchased and they should not have the final decision as to what people load onto their own devices.

  70. How about the following: by drolli · · Score: 1

    a) apple does not censor apps at all

    b) we try to deal with the problem by education and information instead of forbidding it

    c) If its free, rate the app down (i dont have an iphone). Write comments like "a friend tried it and is now severely depressed".

    1. Re:How about the following: by drolli · · Score: 1

      With problem i obviously meant homophobia and not homosexuality, to be clear on that.

  71. It is not rational, but it IS simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you begin with the forgone conclusion that everyone is born straight, and that all homosexual behavior is just a form of rebellion, it makes perfect sense that simple education and emotional support would "cure" the condition. Further, the desire to do so can arise from an earnest desire to help.

    Of course, the best science of our day tells us that this forgone conclusion is a load of bunk. Further, since the methods of education and emotional support aren't effective in "curing" the condition, methods much more akin to brainwashing are used instead. The need for such methods provides further evidence that sexual preference is a biological predisposition.

    This evidence is, of course, rejected by those who derive their beliefs from the myths of ancient nomads. I also suspect that many of them aren't so earnest in their desire to help as they could, at least in theory be. Most of them simply feel squeamish about the whole thing. Gayness makes them feel uncomfortable, so they don't like to encounter gay people, so they do everything the law allows to try and make the gay people go away....hence brainwashing disguised as medicine.

  72. Why can't anybody with a clue check the facts? by Bogtha · · Score: 1

    It received a '4' rating from Apple, which indicates the company considered the app to contain 'no objectionable material.'

    Apple don't rate the apps in the App Store in this way. The developers themselves rate the app when they submit it. All Apple do is approve it or reject it. Sometimes they accept things they shouldn't. Either the reviewer clicks the wrong button, they make a decision that doesn't reflect company policy, whatever. It happens. Another example is the "baby shaker" app. It was mistakenly approved, then yanked as soon as it was called to their attention.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  73. I wonder ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... if this app reports back to Exodus International. Who downloaded it, what sort of progress users have made through the 'lesson plan'?

    Shame is the biggest problem closeted gays have with their lifestyle. Its why they used to be security risks (and why Don't Ask, Don't tell made them more so). This could give EI a list of potential blackmail candidates.

    1. Re:I wonder ... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      That was precisely my argument against DADT -- closeted homosexuals are a security risk, they could be blackmailed easily if disclosing their practices meant the end of their career. Only openly gay volunteers should be accepted into the military. That being said, they should be discrete and follow the same rules about "conduct unbecoming on officer" that all other military personal must adhere to.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:I wonder ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now, outside of the military, Exodus International has a list of people who don't want to be identified as gay. Perhaps not a security risk as in DoD type security. But someone EI can count on to do their bidding. Or else they'll be outed.

    3. Re:I wonder ... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      They've got nothing compared to the Church of Scientology, which keeps a record of what was discussed in every "auditing" session.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  74. So says the all-knowing oracle by Quila · · Score: 4, Informative

    "You don't know any 'ex-gays' either. Because there is no such thing. There are only gay people who have gone back in the closet."

    That would be a surprise to those I know. I was wrong on one point. I thought you were going to say they weren't gay in the first place, just experimenting.

    Either way, the fact that it is a choice doesn't fit into your pro-homosexual agenda, so it can't be an option.

    1. Re:So says the all-knowing oracle by SpryGuy · · Score: 0

      The fact that it isn't a choice is why it's not an option. It has nothing to do with an agenda.

      Sure, bisexual people have more of a "choice" in how they express their sexualty than most people. But homsoexuals are homosexual, and heterosexuals are heterosexual. This is just a fact. Almost by definition.

      It's your anti-gay agenda that blinds you to this, apparently.

      The fact is, there are no ex-gays. There just aren't. They don't exist, at least as you imagine them. "gay" isn't a lifestyle. It has nothing to do with drugs or casual sex or barbara or liza or any of that stereotypical crap. I think a lot of so-called "ex-gays" are rejecting the empty, shallow, stereotypical "lifestyle" more than anything. They've confused it with sexual attraction somehow. Totally different. Maybe they felt a little same-sex attraction (being bi at some level), and so with black-and-white-thinking, they dove head-first in to the stereotypes. When they found that unsatisfying ultimately, they rejected it, thinking "I don't want to be gay" or "I'm not gay after all". That's confusion on their part, but understandable.

      But you don't suddenly "turn" homosexual, or "turn" heterosexual. And you cannot be "cured" of homosexuality to become an "Ex-gay". That's just a ridiculously stupid notion, based almost entirely in ignorance and homophobia.

      --

      - Spryguy
      There are three kinds of people in this world: those that can count and those that can't
    2. Re:So says the all-knowing oracle by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Seriously - you believe it's a choice?

      Really?

      Dumb, ignorant arsehole - but hey, thats your choice

  75. the most appropriate response by cas2000 · · Score: 1

    the most appropriate response would be to create an app to "Cure Heterosexuality" or "Cure Christianity".

  76. Garden Walls ... by 517714 · · Score: 1

    make this a cage fight!

    --
    The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
  77. Re:Walled Gardens by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is it remotely possible that what goes on in the Premier App Store of the country then becomes a microcosm of what the country "decides it is thinking"? I'm not good enough at the math to do this next bit, but as a fast & rough theory, we're starting to get a Walled Garden set of laws.

    Spot on. But it's important to remember that we're seeing a trivialization of government, despite the ongoing claims of government being "too big". There's an effort to make it meaningless, to put government itself behind the "walled garden" so that corporatists can do as they please. It's why I'm very leery of the "government is the problem" crowd, because throughout our history, if government has been a problem, it's been our problem. But the effort to destroy our institutions is coming from a level above governments. Destroy Social Security so all the enormous amounts of money it collects goes to the transnational banks. Destroy Medicare so the transnational insurance companies can get all that money. Destroy education and the legal system so the big corporations involved in "privatizing" schools, and prisons can collect all the money. There's a law in Michigan being passed by their GOP government to allow the governor to take any municipal government, any town, any county and just hand it over to "private industry" (which just happens to be the governor's buddies). There will still be taxes collected, but it will go into the hands of people beyond the control of citizens. After all, if you objected to say, Haliburton, how would you go about using the "free market" to bring them in line? How do you vote Haliburton or Bank of America or Goldman Sachs out of power?None of us are their customers.

    TaoPhoenix, you're right on the mark with your "fast and rough theory". And the best we can hope for is that the "deep social pressure" overflows with enough force to disrupt their plans.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  78. BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Expression that a private company chooses to provide a platform for has nothing to do with "free speech". By inclusion of this "app" in their store, Apple is endorsing its content.

  79. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    True, but they already have a record of infringing on free speech, so there you go.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  80. shrewd move by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    It's a smart gambit if your objective is to take a stand on free speech. It's an even smarter gambit if your intent is to support gay culture. Free Speech benefits "gay culture" in the end. Start with an anti-gay app. take the heat. then publish "gay" apps. who can object? Now think about what happens if you do in the opposite order. Apple takes a neutral stand on gay employees which ultimately is pro-gay. so it's reasonable to see this as a gambit to establish that same neutrality in the app world.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:shrewd move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then publish "gay" apps. who can object?

      A friend of mine published a gay app for iPhone years ago. It was a tool that would allow gay people to find likeminded people in the neighbourhood. As far as I know, Apple had no problems with that.

    2. Re:shrewd move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A couple of years ago, I bought an iPhone. I was having a bad day, and installed Grindr, an application like the one you described. I got chatting to another Grindr user, who had recently installed the app himself.

      Cutting a long story short, we are getting married in six weeks :-)

    3. Re:shrewd move by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Congrats! Best of luck with the big day, sure it'll be fab :)

    4. Re:shrewd move by Golddess · · Score: 1

      It's an even smarter gambit if your intent is to support gay culture.

      I'm not entirely certain Apple intends to support gay culture. I thought I recalled a previous /. story about Apple banning homosexuality in apps, but this non-/. article is all I could find.

      http://gawker.com/#!5563119/apples-gay-culture-bans-dont-make-it-moral-or--pure

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
  81. Jesus was probably gay!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus preached tolerance and love. Jesus didn't marry. Jesus was together with man.

    I don't want to offend, but........... It really seems Jesus was gay, and that doesn't disturb me.

    http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jegay.htm

    1. Re:Jesus was probably gay!! by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      Jesus's favorite disciple was Mary Magdalene. According to the Gnostic Gospels, Jesus frequently kissed Mary and loved her more than the male disciples. So I strongly suspect Jesus was in fact straight. However, he did preach tolerance and made a point of associating with the outcasts of society, leading me to think that he would have loved gay believers just as much as any other.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    2. Re:Jesus was probably gay!! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the Gospel of Danbrown clearly states that Jesus did marry and have a son.

  82. Being gay cannot be cured by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

    If you consider yourself gay and you can be re-educated to prefer hetero sex, then in reality you were bisexual, you are bisexual, and you will always be bisexual. So yes, a few people can be converted, those people that were actually bisexual to begin with. For those that are truly homosexual, this software should be about as successful as re-educating true heterosexuals to prefer gay sex, i.e. it ain't gonna happen!

    And yes, insisting that the sexual preference that God created someone with is something that needs to be "cured" is offensive on many levels.

    --
    I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    1. Re:Being gay cannot be cured by FrootLoops · · Score: 1

      With the variation in people and how many of us there are, I'd be surprised if not one single person honestly changed their sexual preference throughout their lifetime. Maybe they get bored, or experience makes them appreciate different traits over time for whatever reason. I imagine it would be rare--significantly rarer than homosexuality/bisexuality, which themselves aren't *that* common. The continuity of one's sexuality depends a lot on the definition used, which is a subtle but probably pointless discussion. In general though, I tend to agree that true "converts" probably were just bisexual and never seriously tried the opposite sex.

    2. Re:Being gay cannot be cured by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok. Care to explain the mechanism that determines sexual orientation in that case? Because if you have an answer, researchers would love to hear it.

      Otherwise shut your non-scientific mouth the fuck up.

    3. Re:Being gay cannot be cured by Locke2005 · · Score: 2

      Care to explain the mechanism that determines whether one is left handed or right handed? Just because you can't explain exactly why a phenomena occurs doesn't mean the phenomena does not exist.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
  83. Censoring the app unseen because if its publisher by billstewart · · Score: 1

    I started seeing articles attacking this app last week, and what really frustrates me about them is that they say that Apple ought to ban the app because it's EVIL, and then go talking about how evil the organization that publishes it is, but never say anything about the app itself. It looked very much like they hadn't actually seen it, and criticizing it for being evil without seeing it first is really inappropriate.

    I'm sure that once they take a look at it, it will either be as evil as they're claiming or else somewhat lamer than that, but they really shouldn't be attacking it before they've seen it, just because they're prejudiced against people who are prejudiced against them.

    So thank you for contributing actual information to this discussion - you're the first person I've seen who's done so :-)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  84. There are "gay iphone apps" already. by Animats · · Score: 1

    Apple allowed Grindr: "The app makes use of the device geolocation, which allows users to access other gay and bisexual men within close proximity. This is accomplished through a simple user interface that displays a grid of representative pictures of men, arranged from nearest to farthest away." I'm surprised that one passed Apple's porno filter.

    So, if the opposition wants to have a say, so be it.

  85. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The religious bigotry industry (which is not really an industry in the first place) is bigger than the multi-BILLION dollar porn industry?! And industry that has even been estimated in the trillions depending on your definition and extent of the use of the word pornography? Are you freaking kidding me?! Or, are you just letting your own (stupid) biases shine through?

  86. Really!?!? They're the only store in the world? by Brannon · · Score: 1

    They have the only smartphones in the world and the only App store in the world? And they control every web site on the planet?

    Really?

    1. Re:Really!?!? They're the only store in the world? by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 1

      Well, we're getting a bit off-topic here.

      We're not talking about web sites. This is about the App Store. The argument is that, in the real world, a storeowner can choose what they want to sell and don't necessarily have to worry about somebody suing them for not carrying a product. So, to use my above example, If I choose to not sell Playboy, I don't have to worry about some customer suing me over it because there are alternate stores for the person to go to.

      So if we take that analogy to say iOS = town and App Store = Magazine Store, the owner the Magazine store also controls the town and restricts other stores that might compete with it. Needless to say, in the real world, that would probably evoke some sort of lawsuit.

      Now, if we continue with our analogy, there are certainly other "towns" that you can live in.

  87. can you play Wii games on your PS3? by Brannon · · Score: 1

    I guess that makes those companies evil.

    1. Re:can you play Wii games on your PS3? by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 1

      One of the reasons you can't play Wii games on your PS3 is the same reason why you can't play a DVD in a tape drive. They aren't compatible. But so long as someone with the source code for the game (generally the developer) can port it to the other system without asking anyone's permission, that isn't "evil." It's just annoying.

      Of course, if the Sony is prohibiting developers from writing software for the PS3 until Sony approves its content, then they're doing the same thing as Apple and it is condemned on the same grounds.

    2. Re:can you play Wii games on your PS3? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Of course, if the Sony is prohibiting developers from writing software for the PS3 until Sony approves its content, then they're doing the same thing as Apple and it is condemned on the same grounds.

      All three console makers do the same thing as Apple, except even more strictly. Nintendo even flat-out denies home-based businesses the privilege to publish on its platforms; I'm under the impression that Sony does as well.

      And to continue the analogy between iOS and Android, it's not always possible for a developer to just skip the consoles and go to the PC because some genres don't work on a PC. For example, could a platform-fighting game like Smash Bros. or an overhead arena-based combat game like Bomberman work well on a PC? Hudson tried porting Bomberman to the PC a decade and a half ago and to my knowledge hasn't revisited it since. Capcom ported Street Fighter IV to the PC; sales were too low to warrant porting the updated "Super" edition. These games are best played with real-life friends, with a set of gamepads, on a big screen that four people can fit around. PCs display fine on HDTV monitors, and one can pick up four USB gamepads and a hub for $70, but I've been told there are nowhere near enough such installations to make a market for home theater PC games. (Feel free to ask for sources.) Likewise, Nokia N900 phones exist, but especially in English-speaking countries, the installed base is minuscule compared to iPhone and Android-powered phones.

  88. The app and the organization by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Why is it an app? Probably because apps are trendy, and can be sold for small amounts of money, and they get to call themselves cool for having written one, and they can tell the people who donate to them about the exciting work they're doing so please give more money. Also, it's portable, so if you need hourly reminding not to be gay or something, it's there in your pocket to remind you instead of being back on your PC at home. It's not like there aren't lots of other apps that have no need to be on a phone instead of a website.

    As far as your point about not being supportive of the organization, as the anti-anti-abortion bumper sticker says, if you don't like it, don't ban it, just don't get one. In practice, I don't think they're going to get a lot of customers, and if it makes money it's going to be from their donor channel, not their actual sales.

    The reason Apple should allow them to sell it is "app neutrality" - do you want them deciding what the public should be seeing on their phones, as long as it's not causing technical problems with the phone? Maybe you do - I'd really object if they were selling a KKK literature package app. But I've found it really annoying that the people who are attacking Apple for having not censored it yet seem to be doing so without knowing anything about the app except the organization that's selling it.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  89. "Hate Speech" vs. "Speech You Hate" by billstewart · · Score: 2

    The problem is that this speech isn't intended to cause damage to human beings. It's intended to help them overcome a problem that the organization considers to be seriously bad for them. That's much different from, say, encouraging gay-bashing, even though both of them start from the belief that being gay is bad.

    Whether you agree with that or not is a separate question, but if you think they're wrong, they're not in the "Hate Speech" or "Falsely Shouting Fire In A Theater" category - they're in the "Preaching the Wrong Religion" category or maybe the "Quack Medical Advice" category.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:"Hate Speech" vs. "Speech You Hate" by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Yet is IS damaging to many, many people.

      They may not "intend", but that is the practical outcome.

    2. Re:"Hate Speech" vs. "Speech You Hate" by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      The exact same argument could be made regarding "The O'Reilly Factor". I don't think that should be suppressed either.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  90. Hilarity ensues by Legion303 · · Score: 1

    Installed app as a joke on my frat bro's phone and it turned him gay. Plz fix this bug. ONE STAR.

  91. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

    You have got to be kidding. Porn is big time. And since much of the porn out there has lesbian scenes of some sort, that would make it "pro gay" too.

    I realize that you're going for the mod points, but really.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  92. Using "gay" as an insult in non-sexual contexts by billstewart · · Score: 2

    This one annoyed me when it started to become popular. Maybe we should just blame South Park for it, but it seems to be a juvenile thing about making yourself feel more secure about your masculinity and sexual orientation by using the alternative as an insult and as a tool for social pressure. Is it because boys that age are still scared of girls, and need extra social pressure to go out and interact with them to avoid being thought of as gay, and they'd rather be harassed as being gay, when they're know they're not, than for being immature, when they know they are?

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Using "gay" as an insult in non-sexual contexts by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      What do you say to those who still use "queer" to mean odd and "gay" to mean happy? To those who use "nigger" as a term of comradeship? To those who use "niggardly" despite the obvious opportunity for mishearing? How far does your monopoly on word usage extend?

      I find official attempts to rewrite the language much more insidious than organic changes. Whether it's "shell shock" becoming "PTSD", "crippled" becoming "differently abled" or "sick note" becoming "fit note" (thanks, England!), it's far worse when impact is taken out of words rather than added to them - ostensibly out of political correctness but fundamentally out of a desire to suppress human identity and frailty.

      Words like "faggot" and "nigger" and "cripple" have a rich history pointing to our cultural development over the centuries. Let's understand that they did and still do have multiple meanings, and rather than condeming some meanings as WRONG and others as CORRECT, how about we instead only worry about whether people are causing harm? I've been able to spend my life using "queer" to mean "odd" and have never used it to mean "homosexual" (except when mentioning the '90s gay soap Queer as Folk). I've used "gay" to mean "homosexual", "effeminate" (this is not an insult - too many are worried that it is) or "lame" depending on context without anyone raising an eyebrow. If you're going to argue against use of "gay", then argue against it entirely when the word can be ambiguous - for example, it might be avoided in a technical environment just as any good engineer avoids a marketing buzzword. But don't deny it.

  93. Straight to gay by FrootLoops · · Score: 1

    That reminds me of something I've wondered before. There are people trying to turn gays straight. Does anyone try to do the reverse, i.e. turn straight people gay? If so, how successful is it?

  94. Simply smashing idea! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Exodus International versus RuPaul's Dragulator

    I predict a quick win for the RuMan because the Dragulator goes from zero to *fabulous* in no time flat!

    Hey, don't look a me. That's *his* slogan for it.

  95. I think what he's saying... by billstewart · · Score: 1

    I think what he's saying is that the medieval Catholic Church's practice of extorting money so your mom would get out of Purgatory was the main heresy that the Protestants were rebelling against, not saying that all Protestants are like the televangelists who want you to donate money. And while Luther's 95 Theses also argued against 94 other things the Church was doing wrong in those days, that certainly was one of the more egregious problems.

    On the other hand, once Luther's Reformation happened, there were lots of other causes having to do with power and money that got involved. Some of them were things like whether the Church could tell King Henry he can't have a divorce just because there's this other chick he liked (though they don't seemed to have minded him beheading the second one when he dumped her for the third, so it's not like there isn't plenty of blame to go around.)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  96. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did the a format war ever get won by the "religious bigotry industry" picking sides? I don't think so.

  97. Buuuuuurn! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Oh, snap!

  98. Yo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It actually works though, I used to be gay but now i'm swimming in porn stars and banging 7 gram rocks

  99. This is what you get by evilpenguin · · Score: 1

    (as others have noted) when you filter at all.

    By opting to edit "objectionable material" they have opened themselves up to this.

    I think people who think gayness can be "cured" are idiots. But for all I know these app developers are actually following my personal code of business ethics: "1. A fool and his money are my target market, and b. It is morally wrong to allow stupid people to keep their money."

    (Or is this a free app?)

    I'm firmly of two minds: The first is my standard response whenever anyone objects to any media content: You don't have to buy/watch/listen. There's an "off" switch. Use it.

    The other mind is every company that appoints itself guardian of my content should have its arse sued into oblivion.

    All I know is that my next device will be android. Not because of this specific case, but because of Apple's consistent impulse for control. The iPhone served me well as a user, but as a developer it rather sucks and the android platform and range of devices have come along nicely.

  100. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

    Starting to block apps because of a point of view espoused therein wont go WORSE for them?

    Lets put it this way, if a different author had spun it different, "Apple likely to block app because of Author belief", you dont think 80% of slashdot would be crying for a lynching?

  101. Choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I suppose the question you have to ask is whether it would be acceptable to release an app that purports to change a straight man gay. I doubt there'd be a problem with that so I can't see a problem with this, I mean its not enforced to use it or even down load it so if you are queer and don't want to be then give it a whirl and if you don't then don't.

  102. Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's not how personal preferences are formed. You don't have a genetic program that determines who you will have sex with. If there were a gay gene, they'd have found it by now. Sex is a creative process, and the people taking part in it decide how it will happen. Saying you don't choose to be gay is like saying you don't choose to be an engineer. I happen to be an engineer, but I don't believe that I had to be one, or that I could not put down my computer and pick a paintbrush or a hammer tomorrow if I wanted to.

    Human development is a process of growth and exploration. It's not a deterministic process of like following a flow chart to your destination. People self-select who they are and who they will become. It is an amazing process that is shrouded in mystery. Telling someone that they are who they are, and they can't choose is as bad as telling them that it's wrong to be who they are because the did have a choice. Either is dis-empowering and unloving. Ultimately, you are responsible for who you are and who you will become. Where these Christian nut-jobs get screwed up they think it's their job to take that responsibility from the ones who rightly have it.

    This app is misguided, but it's completely voluntary. If it's another step in people learning about who they are and taking the next step, I'm all for it, no matter how misguided it is.

    1. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You clearly know what you want to believe, and avoid or ignore all scientific literature that will conflict with it. If you didn't it would be very hard for you to keep your current beliefs.

    2. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mangu · · Score: 2

      If there were a gay gene, they'd have found it by now.

      It seems that there's evidence for it. Of course, the genome isn't everything, but it determines what tendencies we will have.

    3. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure if serious...

      Anyway...

      It could simply be that it's not a single gene. I mean we're talking about major body-wide biological systems systems here. From a strictly biological standpoint sex is the only purpose of life. Reversed sexual preference is probably not just a minor tweak because it contradicts life itself.

      You sound like you might be a bit confused with your own sexual preference and you're projecting that ambiguity on to everyone else in general.

    4. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Tanktalus · · Score: 2

      Just like there are genes that predispose people to be fat, I'm sure there are genes that predispose people away from being straight. That doesn't mean there's no choice. It merely makes it harder to lose the weight for the former group, and harder to have fulfilling, sexually intimate relationships with the opposite gender for the latter group.

      If there were no choice about it, then I don't see how my identical-twin cousins could have one turn out gay and one turn out straight.

      Those who claim that it's just the way people are born actually do the gay community a disservice at times. The identical twin who is straight obviously feels very threatened that he might "become" gay, which is preposterous. But he believes the bullshit, knows that he's an identical twin, and gets the concept that he and his (now-deceased) brother have identical genes. The reality is that they both handled their mother's departure differently - and that was influenced by their friends. And if I could convince my cousin that homosexuality was a choice rather than genetic, he'd probably not be as physically defensive about his sexuality, and might even be able to relax around gay people. But, as it is, being thoroughly brainwashed that this is genetic, it would not surprise me much if he was eventually charged with a hate crime for criminal assault on a gay man, which would be a bad outcome for two people.

    5. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because they didn't end up the same doesn't mean either of them had a choice, hormons also play a role during pregnancy and early childhood. On the other hand, it does sound like the guy who claims he's straight might just be afraid to admit to himself that he's gay.

    6. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by booch · · Score: 1

      Genetics is not the only "programming" that your body has. Epigenetics also plays a large role. It's also likely that the mix of nutrients (and hormones) you receive in the womb and as a child will play a large role. Add to that early psychological influences and other "nurture" factors, and it becomes very hard to predict outcomes.

      There's research showing that boys with older brothers have a 10% higher chance of being gay for each older brother. The leading theory is that the hormones in the mother's womb are changed permanently due to the presence of the fetal boys. (I'm not sure if there's any research comparing those raised with older brothers versus those born but not raised without older brothers -- that would be interesting and help eliminate the nature/nurture issue.)

      So there is very good evidence that some parts of you are somewhat pre-determined, even if they're not genetic. In the same way that you cannot choose (with too much success) to be short or tall, you're not able to have much effect on the way that you are "wired".

      --
      Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
    7. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      Saying you don't choose to be gay is like saying you don't choose to be an engineer. I happen to be an engineer, but I don't believe that I had to be one, or that I could not put down my computer and pick a paintbrush or a hammer tomorrow if I wanted to.

      Sure. A gay person can of course have sex with a woman. It's just that he'll probably feel awful about it, particularly if he's forced to have sex with women instead of men for the rest of his life.

      And yes, I know how it feels to "choose" something that you lack a "spark". I could have chosen to become a lawyer instead of an engineer, after six years of law school (seemingly endlessly deferred graduation, almost dropped out), yes, I could still have chosen a career path that I will probably hate.

      By why would you want somebody to try being somebody who they are not, instead of accepting who they are?

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    8. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      By why would you want somebody to try being somebody who they are not, instead of accepting who they are?

      This statement assumes the hypotheses that being gay is not a choice. Saying that you can't be happy being straight is that same as saying that you need to be gay as far as I'm concerned. So I'd agree that if you feel strongly that you need to be gay, trying to use your willpower to resist that is counterproductive. That's why I say this app is misguided. But banning the app will not solve the problem, because people need to be free to explore their options and they need to learn for themselves that this kind of thing doesn't work.

      I do not mean to say that it's impossible for someone to feel that they have not other choice but to be gay. What I am saying is that's not the reality of the situation, and that people don't need to feel that way. People are not so different that it's possible or one man to love a woman and impossible for another. But the prejudices and preferences we accumulate over time influence the kind of relationships we are comfortable building over time. Those preferences are not hard-wired, and in reality changing them only requires being open-minded to the possibility that your next relationship with someone of that sex does not have to be the same as the last.

      Again, it makes no difference to me whether someone has sex with men or with women. But I'd rather see people having sex because they want to. Not because they feel compelled to by their emotions or because of social pressure, or because some scientist says they need to be gay or straight. In reality, the key to realizing your true identity (that is the person you are today, and the person you want to become in the future) is exploring your feelings today, and being open to the idea that things may be different tomorrow.

    9. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      There's research showing that boys with older brothers have a 10% higher chance of being gay for each older brother. The leading theory is that the hormones in the mother's womb are changed permanently due to the presence of the fetal boys.

      This is not a theory because it is not backed by evidence. Scientifically speaking, this is a hypothesis that researchers are investigating. While it is true that younger sons are more likely to be gay, spastically speaking, there is no evidence today that this has a physical cause.

      But, this talk of statistics is beside the point I am trying to make. My complaint is that this kind of thinking ignores the reality (as I see it) that people self-determine their identity. That fact that this evidence is stated probabilistically lends credence to the idea that there is not a physical explanation for such preferences.

      You may say it is only my opinion, but I believe it because of my personal experiences. Ultimately, though, my argument is a philosophical one. If scientific research has left wide open the possibility that you have a choice in the matter, why choose to believe that you don't? If I am to believe that I have no choice in who I am, or who I will become, what point is there in living? Why believe you are a slave to your desires, and that you have no say in them if the science doesn't require it?

    10. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      I've read a lot about it. . .

    11. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      What you see in these studies is that people are able to find correlations in smaller samples, but those correlations diminish or disappear in larger more directed studies.

      The most compelling finding is that that if one twin is gay it is positively associated with the other being gay as well. However, this is also the most damming because it is such a small association while twins are completely identical genetically. All the arguments that that sexuality is physically determined (either by genetics or by the hormone environment in the womb) rely on the existence of unknown or unproven physical factors.

      Nevertheless, even if these hypotheses are one day proven true, the actual effects, statistically speaking, are known to be small. That leaves a huge hole in the science of determinism for people who wish to be masters of their own sexual fate to slip through.

    12. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by currently_awake · · Score: 1

      Sexual orientation is hardwired into the brain, sometimes the wires get crossed. Homosexuality is a birth defect not a choice. The world would be a better place if we could fix that (or accept those with this disability) but that's beyond our current medical tech. The app is basically worthless beyond entertainment. Also, I don't think the religious devout would consider the app hateful.

    13. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Saying you don't choose to be gay is like saying you don't choose to be an engineer. I happen to be an engineer, but I don't believe that I had to be one, or that I could not put down my computer and pick a paintbrush or a hammer tomorrow if I wanted to.

      That is the most idiotic argument against homosexuality that I have ever seen. Yes, you could choose to become an artist or a carpenter instead of an engineer. Just as I could choose to stop being a programmer and do something else. But I'd no longer be doing what I loved to do. I may have chosen my career, but I could never have chosen to love it. Loving it just came naturally.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    14. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by pablo_max · · Score: 1

      It is interesting that in nature, homosexuality is natural response in some species to over population conditions.
      It is even more interesting that you imagine humans to be outside nature.

    15. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      Loving it just came naturally.

      What I'm saying is that it didn't. That's what I said in my second paragraph.

    16. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Technically, as nature works, most of the psychologically oriented genes are generally setting a PREFERENCE. What we actually end up with is molded both by preference as well as social factors. Sexuality is only one of many traits that seem to function this way.

      Also there's always that infamous "gay hater" test, where they put a rubber band on guys' penises (to measure erection) and then put them in a room with gay porn. Then took them out of the room, and questioned them on whether movie turned them on, and what they think of homosexuality.
      Results were just plain sad. Most people who scored high on getting an actual erection to gay porn typically denied having any reaction to the movie far stronger then those who didn't, and generally were anti-gay in a very forceful way. I.e. self-denial breeding massive wave of hatred to block their real preference - essentially a psychological self defence mechanism.

      And lastly, as many psychological studies strongly suggest, vast majority of humanity (and for that matter, many mammals) are likely to be bi-sexual to at least some extent. Pure heterosexuality or homosexuality is more of an exception then a rule. It's just that in most attraction for other sex is sufficient to fill the sexual needs, therefore active, energy consuming pursuit of same sex is deemed unnecessary. Think of all the gay men who can still have sex with women and achieve an orgasm for a great example (and get children), as well as strong demand for transsexual male prostitutes for great examples of this.

    17. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      I didn't use the word natural, you did. However, I would like to submit this definition of the word to you, which is appropriate for you to understand the argument I am trying to make

      define:natural

      unthinking; prompted by (or as if by) instinct; "a cat's natural aversion to water"; "offering to help was as instinctive as breathing"

      I know that people can behave this way, but I don't think they have to. The necessity is thoughtfulness. I think it is possible to work through your emotions rather than blindly accepting them (as the poster I am responding to would) or rejecting them (as the writers of this app would). Just because you live in the natural world does not mean you have to blindly follow your feelings and desires. I'm saying that the thoughtful man can understand their emotions and work with them rather than being ruled by them.

    18. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 1

      I've read a lot about it. . .

      Finish reading, and start living now. Ever think that the poor people who feel that they have to go m2f are taking charge? How much must you feel that you simply are a certain way to take charge with a step like that? Go out and meet some people. I've never known a gay person who thought it was cool when they realized what was going on in their head, only people who've dealt with their situation better or worse; it's gotta be bad enough to know that large parts of society will never accept them, please don't make it worse by telling them to will themselves a way that they aren't.

    19. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      You have not understood me correctly.

    20. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Bitmanhome · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen an ugly woman? Did you choose to regard her as ugly? What if you found all women to be ugly, and only men could be "pretty"? Then you'd be gay, and not by choice.

      By the way, you didn't chose to be an engineer, you discovered it. You could take up the paintbrush and become a picture painter, but you don't want to -- you want to be an engineer. Choice is not involved.

      --
      Not that this wasn't entirely predictable.
    21. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      That's not how it works. Everyone sees men and women who they think are attractive. Just because you find someone attractive doesn't mean you have to have sex with them. And someone who seems ugly at first may seem more attractive as you get to know them better. The opposite is also true.

      I love art, I also love building houses. Actually, I've never done work I didn't love. I've had jobs I didn't love, but that was because of the people I was working with not the work I was doing. I did not "discover" engineering. My father was an engineer and I studied engineering because I wanted to be like him. If I had it to do over again knowing what I know now, I may not have chosen it, and in the future, I may do something different. I'm not stuck with it. I think people get stuck in their ways for a lack of open-mindendess and an overabundance of investment in their present reality. I don't believe this is necessary for people, and I know it is not necessary for me.

    22. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      That argument is idiotic, in the sense that it ignores the main reason why one identifies as gay - which is when the sex you get arousal with is your same sex.

      Note that in all your posts in this thread you use 'being gay' as an identity, but you carefully left out 'being aroused by someone of the same sex', something that can't be chosen and which is what people usually call being gay. One can be "open to the idea that things may be different tomorrow" and not "feel that they have not other choice but to be gay", and still be gay without having mad a deliberate choice - because he only gets aroused by men, and no amount of open-mindedness nor willingness to change can avoid that. Your argument precludes that possibility, which happens to be the experience of many (nearly all)? gay men.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    23. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      Then in your eyes, men who are aroused by other men, but wish to be straight should resign themselves to a life of quiet desperation. The can't have what they feel they need, no matter what. They have only two choices, to pretend to be straight or pretend to be ok with being gay. That's not unlike the lives that most people live. I'm trying to tell you it doesn't have to be that way.

    24. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This can't really be a serious post. Homosexuality a a birth defect and a disability? How has this not been modded into oblivion?

    25. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Xest · · Score: 1

      The world would also be a better place if you jumped off a cliff and took your ignorance with you.

      "Also, I don't think the religious devout would consider the
      app hateful."

      Yes, that's because they're as ignorant and stupid as you are.

    26. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      That's not how personal preferences are formed. You don't have a genetic program that determines who you will have sex with.

      Oh really? So why is homosexuality found in essentially every mammal species? I really doubt they *all* have some kind of socially-based sexual-preference-building apparatus that happens to make a small proportion of almost every mammal species gay.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    27. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Kelbear · · Score: 1

      That kind of "choice" has little practical bearing.

      It's one thing to be a fat guy choosing to eat less. The amount of distress they'd have to overcome to go against their inherent inclination is relatively minimal.

      Looking at the idea of a gay guy choosing to be straight, and flipping it around: How many straight guys do you know would willingly choose to get penetrated, or to penetrate another man? To wrap their tongue around another man's penis? Sort of a horrible reverse "what-would-you-do-for-a-klondike bar" quiz.

      It's a really damned high obstacle to overcome. You'd pretty much have to be holding a gun to my head, and I'm still not sure I'd be willing to do it even then. Sure, I can see a man as being "beautiful" or pleasing to look at, but at no point do I want to have sex with him.

      If a choice comes into play, I think it really only applies for bisexuals.

    28. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      I really doubt they *all* have some kind of socially-based sexual-preference-building apparatus that happens to make a small proportion of almost every mammal species gay.

      Why would you doubt that? It's not present in every mammal species, and even if it were it could have a social cause rather than a physiological one (as they haven't proven a physiological link). Also, this is a list of animals displaying homosexual behavior, and does not preclude them from engaging in heterosexual sex (in humans we say someone is homosexual if they are exclusively homosexual).

    29. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Bitmanhome · · Score: 1

      No no, you've completely lost the chain of the argument here. "Finding" people attractive is *my* point; your point is that people *choose* to find them attractive. You admit to loving art and construction, which is exactly my point -- you didn't *choose* to love those things, you *discovered* that you loved them. And while you may have started studying engineering because of your father, you took it up as a job because of your natural talent and enjoyment of the field.

      You didn't *choose* any of these things, they were chosen for you before you were ever born.

      --
      Not that this wasn't entirely predictable.
    30. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      That's one way of looking at things. But it seems like I love an awful lot of things if that is the case. Maybe I'm just really lucky that I have so many options for what to do with my life and I love them all. Maybe it's because I don't think that I have to love the things I love and I don't think I have to hate the things I hate. I think it's the latter, because it seems obvious from my point of view.

    31. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by XLR8DST8 · · Score: 1

      there may not be a single gay gene but maybe different combinations of genetics might predispose someone? or it could be both nature AND/OR nurture. -in my opinion, having a gay brother, it's not a choice at all. but could there be some type of genetic layout such as the way or amount certain hormones are produced/etc. ? but it can be maybe something he's experienced also. never got abused or anything, & does have the same childhood i did, but maybe his experiences of that childhood might have been different.

      but otherwise, agreed, & i'd mod up if i had points.

    32. Re:Just where do or preferences come from? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sex is a creative process, and the people taking part in it decide how it will happen.

      Sexuality and attraction can't be distilled to "deciding how it will happen". What you're describing is mutual consent, not motivation or desire.

      Saying you don't choose to be gay is like saying you don't choose to be an engineer.

      No, it's like saying you don't choose to be [insert ethnicity, gender, hair color, or sexual preference here]. The ONLY way your logic works is to say something like:
      "We're all equally attracted (or close enough) to everything & everyone. Regardless if they're male, female, pre-teen, or other species. Gays CHOOSE to be gay, just as I CHOSE to love the opposite sex ... instead of my dog. I made that conscious decision."
      Then I ask ... when did you choose to be heterosexual?
      I happen to be an engineer, but I don't believe that I had to be one, or that I could not put down my computer and pick a paintbrush or a hammer tomorrow if I wanted to.

      Key words = "if I wanted to"

  103. Not Strictly True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It received a '4' rating from Apple, which indicates the company considered the app to contain 'no objectionable material.'

    No, it did not.

    Apple do not rate apps. Apple either accept, or reject apps, but they do not rate them. Developers put their own ratings on apps. So, funnily enough, the bigoted homophobes who wrote the app self-labelled it as a "4".

  104. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Froggels · · Score: 0

    They got themselves into this mess by imposing editorial control over the iPhone in the first place. They made their bed, now they get to lie in it.
    This is the real problem I have with Apple and the fact that they control whatever content gets loaded to what they see as "their" devices. I miss the days when just anyone with programming knowledge could write a program to run on a computer. Today's hardware is far too locked down and protected by draconian DRM and similar "laws." Apple and similar companies seem to think that they are leasing hardware rather than selling it.

  105. keep it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple, keep the app. If you have "gay rights" apps, there is nothing wrong with having a "help for gays" app too.

  106. No "Unknown sources" on AT&T by tepples · · Score: 1

    Isn't that elsewhere called "Android"?

    Not if AT&T is the only provider with good signal coverage in an area. Android-powered phones sold by AT&T restrict users to Google's market by hiding the "Settings > Applications > Unknown sources" checkbox, unlike every single other Android-powered phone or PDA I can think of, and users can't install an alternative market or downloaded APKs.

    It's also horribly inconvenient for end users, who have to carry two separate devices: their existing device to run their existing iOS apps and a second device to run Android apps.

  107. Moving to another town by tepples · · Score: 1

    Now, if we continue with our analogy, there are certainly other "towns" that you can live in.

    But you likely won't have a support network of friends and family in those towns, just as you have to give up your existing purchased apps, movies, and pre-iTunes Plus music when you switch to an Android-powered device.

  108. App Store limited by storage and display capacity by tepples · · Score: 1

    Apple's App Store is also limited by display capacity: only a small number of applications can appear above the fold in each category in iTunes. Apple's App Store is also limited by storage capacity: it costs Apple money to run servers. Furthermore, because Apple manages the payment, it would cost Apple money to refund the purchase price if it were to allow apps that end up not working as advertised.

  109. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exodus is organization that offers people to cure them from their homosexuality. Of course their claim is bogus, but its not just that. They actually harm people, by their false "therapy". One wastes time, money and an energy on a non sense route out from homosexuality.
    And for lot of people from religious families it means cycle of therapy, failing at it, depression etc.

  110. so whats it do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it constantly display "Don't be gay spot" or is it straight porn viewer? Utoh I feel my self slipping over to the rainbow side, better send me lots and lots of straight porn. er hot lesbian porn would be ok too.

  111. Truth Wins Out is the clear offender here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a group or organization wants to provide a choice, then so be it. Truth Wins Out wants to take away a choice so, in fact, Truth Wins Out is the clear offender in this example. If Truth Wins Out wanted to make an app for heteros to go gay then power to them too.

    I cannot support any choices that stifle free speech in clear conflict of the US Constitution. SHAME ON TRUTH WINS OUT! They should know better.

  112. Tough crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are gay, hetero, black, white, Jewish, indian, handicapped, little, blind, deaf, retarded etc...
    Why do you care that someone does not like it and why do you get offended with comments about it? People are different and people think differently from each other. You can not change that and why would you car to? Let me let you in on a little secret, people do not change their feelings easily. On the outside, they may appear to be fine with it but on the inside they still feel the exact same way. Someone that is against the gay lifestyle can be your friend, be nice to you, hang out with you and respect for you just like any other person but deep down, they are still against it and still think there is something wrong with you. Being politically correct and mental acceptance of the situation are two very different levels.

  113. Welcome back to the Dark Ages by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

    Curing Gay people? Whatever next? Curing blonds? Curing tall people? Curing (insert the way you were born here)?

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  114. Aids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought aids was the gay cure.

  115. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But all I feel is schadenfreude. They got themselves into this mess by imposing editorial control over the iPhone in the first place. They made their bed, now they get to lie in it.

    I don't think Apple gives a shit about your armchair schadenfreude. Editorial control is what most of their customers want, so they are getting it. It seems to be making them and their shareholders pretty good money.

  116. Freedom of speech - just don't download it by jobiwankanobi · · Score: 1

    If you don't like the "gay cure" app don't download it. I'm gay - I won't. I know that homosexuality can't be "cured". But I don't like this politically correct stuff that you have to remove these things because they offend people. I don't want some people deciding what I can see and can't see.

  117. fraudulent medical claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is not with what it purports to do or its underlying assumptions, the problem with it is that it is an unproven and likely fraudulent medical treatment.

  118. Judgement! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would have to see the app to make a judgement call whether it's "offensive". While I would immediately side with the developer, Apple should not cater to either side. I believe gayness is a form of psychosis. The reality is that the majority of people are bisexual. Think about that.

  119. This is why gay advocates are annoying by Quila · · Score: 1

    If you don't agree with them, follow their dogma 100%, you're an"ignorant arsehole." You hurt your own cause by alienating people like me who have no problem with homosexuality.

    Reminds me of the very subject of this story, fundamentalist Christians, if you don't agree, you're an idiot going to hell.

  120. You are just as bad as the Christians by Quila · · Score: 1

    "It's your anti-gay agenda that blinds you to this, apparently."

    That's a lie, I have no anti-gay agenda. I stated that up front. It's just like the fundamentalist Christians. When they find out I'm atheist they think I have an anti-Christian agenda too. Both of you alienate those who aren't against you by unfairly attacking at a personal level over differences of belief.

    But if you think it's just a natural occurrence, probably genetic, then it absolutely can be "cured." Gene therapy will eventually get good enough that we will be able to "fix" what makes people homosexual. I don't believe that of course.

    "But you don't suddenly "turn" homosexual, or "turn" heterosexual. The fact is, there are no ex-gays. There just aren't."

    That doesn't explain the people who are, but weren't before, or who aren't but were before. You are being just like the Christians. You say they are "confused" about their sexuality. You can't accept what they say about their own sexuality, that they were gay and now aren't same as the Christians can't accept that someone can just be gay. For both of you, you think you know better than the people themselves.

    "based almost entirely in ignorance and homophobia."

    Another hint to quit alienating people. Using bullshit, loaded and 99% incorrect terms like "homophobia" in every case only makes you look stupid and vindictive. Very few people, even among the Christians (and Muslims BTW), have an irrational, intense and persistent fear of homosexuality. They may be against it, but they don't have a phobia.

  121. I read that study by Quila · · Score: 1

    Total bullshit.

    1. Re:I read that study by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Right, cold population statistics are so inconvenient...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  122. "most gays" by Quila · · Score: 1

    Interesting, I was just told it's FACT.

    Absolute fact, no ability to believe any differently.

    Yet here you tell me that some gays don't believe that.

    I guess they're homophobes.

  123. The conclusions were bullshit by Quila · · Score: 1

    And most likely decided in advance of the study.

    Clearly agenda-driven "science."

    1. Re:The conclusions were bullshit by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Yes, clearly. As well as all other studies possibly upsetting some ancient answers to some questions.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  124. It's never too soon by Quila · · Score: 1

    Ask Gilbert Godfried

  125. Truth Wins Out? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Truth Wins Out? I suppose they they just want to help it along a little bit by squashing dissent instead of engaging it.

  126. Apple will probably remove the app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This might be a good reason for Apple to remove the app:

    http://www.eatliver.com/i.php?n=6070

  127. All Apple's customers are either by Married+to+Christ · · Score: 1

    1) Gay and find the app offensive or 2) Closet homo Xians who would be offended if the app were removed. Either way, all Apple's customers are gay and Apple has to decide which gay customers it will offend.

  128. Sex is a Creative Process you avoid now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny, I would think that if a species couldn't Create their next generation then they would have died-out by now.

    What must these animals do to pass on their genes to the next offspring, or are were talking about Denim Pantaloons and not the same Loons that pass their genes onto their duo-Denom only to be expelled into a porcelain bowel?

  129. How is babby made by sex or putty? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, to my comprehension, we should
    blame Heterosexuals for creating Homosexuals.

    Religion was created by Homosexuals to s
    pew back in the faces of Heterosexuals,
    literaly -- ahhem.

    The race for genetic engineering is to recreate
    a 3-gendered race where the woman is reduced
    to an ugly placenta with a pair of testicles in
    the middle that shed fertile blood as it's own
    reciprocating self-fertilizing incubation chamber
    while the men will be produced into a bunch of
    burly Futas. Example: compare Buck Angel to
    Rosy O'Donnel.

  130. Suicide-promotion group? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
    "Exodus International" - sounds to me like a suicide-support group, like ... what's their names, Swiss, apartments with quality barbiturate overdoses ... "Dignities", or something like that.

    (This is an attempt to make their heads explode ; sometimes ridicule is one of the more effective tools around against certain species of sub-humans, and this seems like such a case to me. If you can do better, feel free to chime in ; comedy isn't in my job specification.)

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  131. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Kalriath · · Score: 1

    The rating is picked by the developer. That means the app submitter selected "No" to "Does your app contain violence? Offensive language? Sexual content?" and a bunch of other things.

    --
    For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  132. Apple isn't restricted by freedom of speech by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why do people keep making the mistake of thinking the constitutional right to freedom of speech applies to private interests that don't take government dollars?

    Apple has a perfect right to sell or not sell what it likes when it comes to legal products.

    Gay rights advocates have a perfect right to kick Apple's ass through boycotts or other legal means for selling stuff they don't like.

  133. who cares... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wats da big deal, theres plenty on nonsense applications out there, if ppl actually want it, let them hav it, if they dont then ignore it...

  134. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they wont allow pornographic or racist apps though which would also infringe the freedom of speech. homophobic idiots

  135. Re:And there's the problem with a "curated" appsto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the highest / most prominent / most expensive / etc. building in most human settlements?

    If the answer's not "my dick" I want it caught and shot right now.

  136. Nothing unusual here, move along... by hazydave · · Score: 1

    As in all things iTunes, Apple is always perfectly correct on every acceptance and rejection of software made available through the iTunes store. When you think there's a problem here, its you who are misinformed. An Apple Store Genius will be happy to assist you. Here, try these rose-tinted glasses, they will calm your raging mind. And have a tall, cool glass of Kool-Aid... you will soon be one with Lanrdu, er, Apple.

    --
    -Dave Haynie
  137. Both sides need to be more honest by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    1. Why does everyone decry censorship, unless it's against a viewpoint they disagree with. Leave the app. What if there is someone who wants to change their lifestyle, who are you to say such a tool should not exist.

    2. Those decrying it's a birth thing, and those decrying it's a social thing are both WRONG and/or DISHONEST. The fact of the matter is that it is both. In some situations we are seeing more evidence of genetic level issues. In fact, we now know some people have multiple DNA, perhaps even having both male and female DNA. But there is also evidence that certain life situations and environment can be the reason an individual chooses a homosexual lifestyle.

    3. Some people are comfortable within that lifestyle, and some people who struggle with being drawn to both lifestyles want to maintain a heterosexual lifestyle in part because of family or other reasons. Those desiring that should have access to tools and support, as do those who do not.

  138. Ignore that parent-Post. Homosex is not nature. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Homosexuality is not a response to overpopulation in nature: it is a culling of the genetics that mitakenly leaves the remnants of sex organs.

    It's the same with worker ants all being female and unable to reproduce under a queen, yet you don't see them "pleasuring" eachother because that's all Homosexuality realy is about: pleasure.

    It's no different than what certain minorities achieve while they rape people of other races: the motivation is pleasure. It's no different than what pederasts achieve while interacting with the innocence near them: pleasure.

    Homosexuals, if ever any were natural, are more evidence that they are the transition stage where humankind reverts to a Caste system and the homosexuals are the burden-bearing non-productive units of that Caste system that will be the last to ever enjoy the pleasures of non-productive Re-bating until the Cast is perfected.

    Only this Caste system is perfected in the Animal kingdom by the releasing of toxic chemicals secreted by the ruling Class: there is your hint right there. What does the Government put into your water or whatnot that causes all these flaws in humans to evince a sterile working Caste known as the Homosexual?

  139. What about Free Speech - Freedom of Religion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now, I have to say that I am gay and that I have personal experience with this particular group having gone to one of their conferences to attend in protest. It was one of the more fascinating experiences of my life infiltrating "the enemy", so to speak. I can attest that although I do not agree with anything they stand for, they do not promote outright hate like say the Westborough Baptist Chrurch "God Hates Fags" people (with whom I also have some experience organizing a counter protest for). Nonetheless, as long as the app is not used as a vehicle to bully or promote hate crimes, I see no problem with it existing because I want the right to continue to speak out against these folks. Protecting their freedom of religious express and speech also protects my right to call them on their bullshit.

  140. Just giving info by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This app seems simply to provide access to information on events run by Exodus International and some podcast material. No one is forced to download it, use it or act upon the information provided. So now the gay-rights movement is clamoring to silence and censor anyone or anything that disagrees with their take on life and origins of homosexuality.

    Does that not deny the human rights of people (and yes there are plenty of them) who say 'I am sexually attracted to members of my sex, do not want this attraction and would like to see if this can be addressed.'? Where is the freedom of these people to choose to explore their sexuality and orientation as befits them? Why are the gay-rights folk so determined to claim attraction is locked and unchangeable for all?

    There is a difference to gays asking for the right to live as they choose and demanding that any information or service that even suggests there is a potential for change be banned and those who promote it locked up. That is very right-wing. I hope Apple keeps the app, and does not give into this knee-jerk reaction.

  141. choice? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a gay man I'm so over the whole discussion of choice vs. born that way. I don't know why I'm gay just that I am. If a white person chooses to marry a black person that's OK. If a brunette chooses to marry a blond that's OK. If all these other choices are OK why is it so important that this be genitic? If it helps with acceptance so be it but shouldn't we all be able to choose love and be OK with who that involves? I suppose with free speech it's alright to have the app.. But how about we include one to get rid of homophobia? Actually Exodus doesn't work and that's been proven. So would Apple take an app from a cancer drug that has been proven not to be effective?

  142. Re:There are "gay iphone apps" already. by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

    Grindr, Scruff, Growlr, Manhunt.... They should have one for Homophobes. So we can have some gay-basher bashing? :)

    --
    E8B8B
  143. I don't care about the answers by Quila · · Score: 1

    I don't have a dog in this fight, so to speak. I am not religious, I don't care some two thousand year old book condemns homosexuality. I think the people who preach against homosexuality are idiots.

    I go on the evidence, what I see, what is rational. And that doesn't fit with what the gay propaganda ministers are producing in the fight against the aforementioned religious zealots.