now i didn't see that coming

>>2538229
slowpoke.jpg

HOMOSEXUALS = APPLE

That is why Apple is the best and deserves everything they charge for their products.

So what? You are also a retard that cares about what homosexuals do in their private life?

This was news two days ago. When we had three threads at the same time for more than twelve hours in here.

It seemed a lot of people were not aware, but here goes:

Alan Turing, the Brit who invented computing and the machine that cracked the German Nazi codes in WW2 was gay. They found out in 1952 and charged him for public indecency (same as they had done for Oscar Wilde) and gave him two options, go to jail or chemicals. Chemicals effectively castrated him. Two years later he injected cyanide in an apple and committed suicide. They found his body with the bitten apple next to it, which is Apple's symbol. This is also why you see some ultra religious guys claim computers are evil because a homosexual invented them, which is flat out wrong as he had nothing to do with computers themselves, he invented computing, a different thing.

Anyhow, that's it.

lol urban legends

>>2538303
According to that /g/ is gay because it spends all the day long raging about something invented by a fag. LOL CRYSYS GAYMEN too. Delicious win.

>>2538329

What's an urban legend here?

Apple did officially opposed the proposition and apple's symbol is based on the apple that killed the person who invented computing. For the record, google opposes the proposition as well.

>>2538303

fake and lame.

>>2538344
>apple's symbol is based on the apple that killed the person who invented computing

No, it is not.

Someone claimed that prop 8 was part of the gay agenda of domination.

I lol'd, heartily

It would make sense these fucking ovepriced cocksuckers.

People don't choose to be gay, they are born gay.

>>2538381

i dunno i recently converted to Macs

>>2538229
>LOL GUISE, WE MAKE FUN OF MACFAGS AND CALL THEM GAY THIS MUST BE FUNNEH XDDDD

>>2538385
You've recently came out of the closet ~_^

Who fucking cares?

I remember back in the day, staying home from school and watching Call for Help on Tech TV ( 'cause TSS wasn't on ).

I remember the guy that had Mac tips. He was a flaming faggot, I mean, he was so gay, you could practically see tanlines on his face from where someone's balls rested...

From that point on I've associated Macs with fags. This doesn't help.

Just a protip for anyone considering the "macho" factor in their next computer purchase.

>>2538505

lol

>>2538505
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BjTUj-_Mxs

he Apple I was sold as a motherboard (with CPU, RAM, and basic textual-video chips)—less than what is today considered a complete personal computer.[15] The Apple I went on sale in July 1976 and was market-priced at US$666.66.

Man this totally reaffirms me of /g/'s values, now I have faith that there are real people out there that have real values. Tell those fags that they can't marry, yeaaaaaahhhhhh. Wave the pantyhose hehehehe.

I don't care if fags want the same rights as straight people while in a relationship, but why do they do shit like refuse offers of civil partnerships?

>>2540005
Because they aren't equal. They are an explicitly seperate and lesser legal construct.

>>2538229
Apple are faggots who can't tell the difference between a civil rights and a political issue.

Marriage is no more a right than sex, and we don't exactly let people do that with what/whomever they please.

Not that I have a problem with but buddies making their relationship "official", or seeking the same benefits that married couples currently enjoy, that's their prerogative, and legitimate self-interest.

However, to call this a civil rights issue is simply an attempt to drag up shit like apartheid in people's minds and brainwash them into following you, because nothing done in the name of "civil rights" should ever be opposed by any right-thinking person, right?

tl;dr: I don't care if gays want to marry, just don't turn civil rights into a fucking emotive buzzword.

>>2540021
But it is, it's called equal protection under the law. And a segment of society is trying to deny equal rights to another.

But /g/ has always subtly been full of bigots. They just express it via Apple threads where it's all mistaken for a joke.

What if someone is a pedophile?
Why shouldn't he be able to marry 10-yr old?
It's natural unlike fagfaggotry.

A lot of you are forgetting what actually happened here and what this is really about.

A while back, California had a vote on whether to allow gay marriage or not. The result was that gay marriage was not allowed, but later some judges were like "naww dawg, fuck dat, we be passin it anyways" and allowed gay marriage.

Basically all this is doing is saying "ya dawg, you did shit wrong, you gotta fix it nao"

>>2540056
you dont have children of your own do you.if you had a daughter of ten years old,the last thing you want to subject her to is the sick sexual appetite of a fifty year old that is patho.ogical and on the verge of being a monster.

>>2540083
So you would keep it banned just because you disagree with it and think it's wrong.

Interesting.

>>2540083
you dont have children of your own do you.if you had a son of eighteen years old,the last thing you want to subject him to is the sick sexual appetite of a fifty year old that is patho.ogical and on the verge of being a monster.

>>2540028
You don't seem to get it. You can't discriminate for ANYTHING under corporeal law. You can't even make separate forms of marriage for different people. If half of the population were sentient robots, we wouldn't be making different kinds of marriage laws for them.

This is government, not religion. The two should have no place in each other's houses.

>>2540028
Really? You mean I can marry another man, because I'm straight? And gay men can't?

No?

Then it's not an issue of anyone being unequal, it's the definition of marriage not suiting the preferences of a minority group.

Just because a minority isn't getting what they want, it doesn't make them unequal.

Again, stop turning important shit into emotive buzzwords to get your own way.

>>2540056
Current argument states that a 10 year old cannot consent to a legally binding contract, and therefore cannot marry.
I am unsure whether they could do so with their parent's consent.

>>2540083
You don't have children of your own either, unless you raped someone. Enoy your ronery.