Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday April 06 2015, @10:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the hypocrisy-knows-no-bounds dept.

David Knowles reports at Bloomberg that former Hewlett-Packard CEO and potential 2016 presidential candidate Carly Fiorina called out Apple CEO Tim Cook as a hypocrite for criticizing Indiana and Arkansas over their Religious Freedom Restoration Acts while at the same time doing business in countries where gay rights are non-existent. “When Tim Cook is upset about all the places that he does business because of the way they treat gays and women, he needs to withdraw from 90% of the markets that he’s in, including China and Saudi Arabia,” Fiorina said. “But I don’t hear him being upset about that.”

In similar criticism of Hillary Clinton on the Fox News program Hannity, Fiorina argued that Clinton's advocacy on behalf of women was tarnished by donations made to the Clinton Foundation from foreign governments where women's rights are not on par with those in America. ""I must say as a woman, I find it offensive that Hillary Clinton travels the Silicon Valley, a place where I worked for a long time, and lectures Silicon Valley companies on women's rights in technology, and yet sees nothing wrong with taking money from the Algerian government, which really denies women the most basic human rights. This is called, Sean, hypocrisy." While Hillary Clinton hasn't directly addressed Fiorina's criticisms, her husband has. “You’ve got to decide, when you do this work, whether it will do more good than harm if someone helps you from another country,” former president Bill Clinton said in March. “And I believe we have done a lot more good than harm. And I believe this is a good thing.”

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by tathra on Friday April 10 2015, @04:25PM

    by tathra (3367) on Friday April 10 2015, @04:25PM (#168770)

    a grand majority of religions

    "a grand majority" is not "all". "Rational religion? That doesn't even make any sense." is equivalent to "all religions are irrational", and when you say "all", all it takes is a single counterexample to prove you wrong, but even if i were to point out a religion that doesn't involve anything [wikipedia.org] that could even be interpreted [wikipedia.org] as supernatural, you'd just say its not a religion, because for you, religion requires magic sky fairies, else its not religion (otherwise you must admit that rational religion can make sense, even if it is only a tiny number of them; i agree with you that most religions are irrational nonsense, i disagree that all of them are).

    Maybe our observations that the Earth is not flat were merely illusions and we live in a virtual reality world, unbeknownst to us all.

    even if our reality is just a simulation, the earth has been proven to be a sphere within the confines of our simulation. unless we find a way outside of the universe, simulation or not, we can only use the metrics from within it to measure things.

    Will the conclusion you started with ever change?

    my conclusion will change when the evidence does. i'd be irrational if i were to believe something contrary to the evidence.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Friday April 10 2015, @05:00PM

    by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Friday April 10 2015, @05:00PM (#168776)

    "a grand majority" is not "all". "Rational religion? That doesn't even make any sense." is equivalent to "all religions are irrational"

    Ah, I see. So your entire position is just you being a pedantic asshole. Alright, then. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

    Even if you are a pedantic asshole, though, I think I've gone into enough detail about my actual position (i.e. not the straw men you keep putting forth) for you to understand it by now, so there's really no excuse. You really do just seem to be bad at comprehending English. Work on that, will you?

    you'd just say its not a religion

    Nope.

    But I find all theism and supernatural garbage to be irrational, not just gods like the Christian god.

    even if our reality is just a simulation, the earth has been proven to be a sphere within the confines of our simulation.

    Really? It has? Maybe everyone was just given false memories by a magical sky daddy. Maybe we have yet to explore anything about this supposed illusion. You can't win this; you'll never have enough evidence to satisfy anything.

    my conclusion will change when the evidence does.

    Wow! That sounds a lot like me.

    • (Score: 2) by tathra on Friday April 10 2015, @05:57PM

      by tathra (3367) on Friday April 10 2015, @05:57PM (#168795)

      Wow! That sounds a lot like me.

      no, this admission of irrationality sounds like you:

      A grand majority of religions are irrational garbage, and a few exceptions to the rule won't make me change my statement.

      i've presented you two [wikipedia.org] religions [wikipedia.org] which don't have anything that could even be interpreted as supernatural plus another that demands rationality, yet you still refuse to accept that such evidence exists, that religion can be rational. you are holding a belief that goes against the facts, the same belief you started with, and no matter how much evidence i present you will never accept it or change your beliefs - you are being irrational.

      • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Friday April 10 2015, @06:49PM

        by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Friday April 10 2015, @06:49PM (#168812)

        no, this admission of irrationality sounds like you:

        Doesn't look like an admission of irrationality to me. I ask again: Do you have trouble comprehending English?

        i've presented you two religions which don't have anything that could even be interpreted as supernatural plus another that demands rationality, yet you still refuse to accept that such evidence exists

        Why are you telling me what I refuse? You don't get to decide what I think, you moron. If you had been paying attention to the conversation at all, or even the statement that you just now quoted, maybe you'd understand my position better. As it is, you're just putting forth straw man after straw man and not even bothering to try to understand my actual position. Or maybe your reading comprehension is just awful. Who knows.

        and no matter how much evidence i present you will never accept it or change your beliefs - you are being irrational.

        According to what you told me a few replies ago, you can't be irrational just by believing something that hasn't been proven true yet, and that people who believe in beings outside the universe without evidence are a-okay. Therefore, I could maintain that all of your 'evidence' is merely an illusion and that you haven't actually put forth any good evidence. It's not irrational because it hasn't been proven false. Checkmate!

        What's sad is that the point I'm making will probably be lost on you.