Apple has unveiled the app of religious group Hope Ministries, which has been accused of inciting anti-gay rhetoric and sees comrades as a "curable" disease, while the chief executive of the religious group clarified: "We love comrades."

Picture | Source

Recently, Apple took over the app of the religious group, Hope Ministries, the "ministries" app, which is considered by nonprofit Truth Wins out to incite anti-gay speech because it claims to be able to For a consultation, group support, online forums and other pipelines to get rid of gay identity, to create a closer relationship with God. (Recommended reading: response to "former comrade" Guo Davi, us to correct same-sex group founder apology "Cure is false")

On the official website of LHM, there are a number of people claiming to be "former comrades" who show up, saying that comrades are a curable disease that can be kept away from "gay" conditions through prayer. One of the "Keys to Recovery from Same-sex attraction" provides a more method:

You need to disconnect yourself from your gay life, photos, souvenirs ... anything linked to the past is the reason for the opening of the door to the original sin of emotion and lust. The way to recover yourself is to disconnect all objects and activities that trigger the emotions of the past.

Truth Wins out then launched a co-sponsorship on the web asking Google, Amazon and Apple to go down the app, and Apple does now, but has not yet issued a statement on the matter.

Picture |Truth Wins out

Ricky Chelete, chief executive of Ministries Hope, said he was unhappy with Apple's offline app, explaining that they had no anti-gay intentions, and that the app was designed to allow people to worship, work, or get other religious resources for free in a simple way: "We only help The people who need us. 」

But Truth Wins out believes the app is encouraging users to switch gay identities through prayer and therapy to become heterosexual. They continue to ask Amazon and Google to drop apps via a joint petition.

Apple recently took the lead in taking the app off the shelves, in fact, in terms of corporate social responsibility, directly reflects its respect, tolerance of the d&i Spirit (multiple communion), but on another level, the next product with anti-gay intentions, but also open a really complex and difficult contemporary discussion.

The fuzziness of the review criteria

According to LHM CEO Ricky Chelete, the app's aim is to provide simple religious resources, not to incite hatred, as Truth Wins out, but to say, "We love all homosexuals. Gay-identified Individu ALS) "

Photo |living Hope Ministries

From one point of view, Apple's spirit of "off the shelves" action to defend the rights and interests of comrades is commendable, small actions can affect the user's perception, LHM think it is not reasonable to be off the shelves, because they respect homosexuality, perhaps lhm can not recognize the way to promote treatment " Love comrade ", regardless of the intention, but to make the situation of comrades more difficult, comrades were stigmatized into a need to correct the disease, so that the public panic." (Recommended reading: Facebook small Revolution: A small step in the change of dating images, a big step in gender affirmative action )

In fact, it also reflects the dialogue we often hear, such as: "I have no objection to comrades ... but ⋯⋯", "we respect comrades, but ⋯⋯" in words, comrades are shaped into a negative implication. Back to daily life, have we also had an unintentional expression of comrades?

On the other hand, to examine this whole down-frame incident, out of the fuzzy nature of the community review criteria, what kind of speech is called the opposite? What kind of talk is quite the same? In fact, in the past, community censorship standards have often been controversial, such as the fact that Facebook has a ban on the dissemination of nudity, because in this way, nude photos in art paintings are prohibited, and for the benefit of women, the public no longer regards nipples as erotic teasing #FreeTheNipple movement, is also prohibited.

This is officially the controversy over the criteria for the review of Community speech, where the right to censor is quite privileged, and whether the community, as a medium for the dissemination of ideas, will also be a tool for suppressing minorities without a clear and sufficiently pluralistic review mechanism?

Therefore, behind the establishment of clear rules, it is necessary to have a pluralistic diversity& Inclusion perspective and thinking in order to ensure that the community gives all people equal voice.