Alec Bailey
Comm 1270
April 3rd, 2015
Values Paper
There is a mass amount of debate, anger, and overall disrespect coming from the
men and woman in the news lately, and when it comes to the controversial gay marriage
article, there is always some form of discrimination on both sides being pounded out. In
the news media today it is hard to see who really has a heart, and who really does respect
the opposite side, even if they disagree with them.
In the Washington Times letter to editor segment, there was letter submitted
called, “More Acts like Indiana Needed.” The article is focusing on the new religious
freedom act that was passed in the senate in Indiana this year. Mark Clark, the man who
wrote in talks about how he is for the bill and he is, “tired of the Tim Cooks and Marc
Benioffs of the world pushing their self-righteous and sanctimonious versions of ‘civil
rights’ and morality onto the rest of society.” (Mark Clark, 2015). The law was brought
about in one specific case where a bakery did not want to make a cake for a homosexual
couple. This law gives the bakery the right to refuse making the cake on the grounds that
it goes against their religion. He goes on to say that the law is not a problem and that
people are blowing it to far out of proportion. He ends his argument with saying how this
law being passed and seeing how Tim Cook reacted to the law has reinforced his beliefs
that men like S. Truett Cathy of Chik-Fil-A are doing the right thing in the work place by
treating all of his employees the same, no matter what religion they are or what sexual
orientation they are.
It is very easy to see Mr. Clarks values in this argument, and they are not ones
that should be denied just because you may believe different. They are values that are
birthed from the heart of man and goes on to attack the people who try to put him down
for it.
The claim Mr. Clark makes here is that people like Tim Cook are doing exactly
what they are saying not to do, and that is hatemongering. He claims this on the grounds
that Tim Cook is coming down hard on people who support this bill, a bill that is about
giving freedom to people. The warrant that Tim Cook is hatemongering and being
hypocrite is made valid here by this example. Both sides of the bill limit some sort of
freedom depending on how you look at it. On the side of Tim Cook it makes
homosexuals have disadvantage in the work place because they can be denied a service
due to a difference in religious beliefs. But on the side of Mark Clark, if you make a
business owner enact something that goes directly against their religion, then you are
putting them at a disadvantage as well.
Rokeach’s terminal and instrumental values plays a big role in this argument.
Clark is looking at this in the same light the Tim Cook is looking at this; they both want a
form of world peace, which comes with equality and freedom. This is a form of a
terminal value that both Clark and Cook hold. Although the way that Tim Cook portrays
his values, is in a negative light in that he doesn’t have very strong instrumental values.
“Opposing discrimination takes courage. With the lives and dignity of so many people at
stake, it’s time for all of us to be courageous,” claims Tim Cook, but isn’t what Cook
claiming here really a discrimination against people with religious views(Tim Cook,
2015)? Politeness is thrown down the drain by the way that he attacks people who
support the bill, whereas Clark addresses the hypocrisy in Cooks claims and does it in a
way that isn’t demeaning. “The notion of boycotting or essentially ‘firing’ the entire
population of Indiana to prevent a perceived oppression from the Religious Freedom Act
is totally absurd.” Claims Mr. Clark (Mark Clark).
Now going off of Tuman’s five attack points, Mark Clark attack Tim Cook with
all five points. Clark disputes Cooks values, with saying that he doing exactly what he is
saying not to do, and that is hatemongering. He disputes his criteria, by saying he
contradicts the fact Cook is trying to fight for American jobs, yet Apple, which Cook is
CEO over, is constantly outsourcing their workload to other countries. Clark disputes
Cooks hierarchy by saying that the way that Cook has reacted is proof that their needs to
be more bills passed that are like the one passed in Indiana. Basically Clark takes apart
everything that Cook has to say on the matter and throws up something that makes Cook
look like he is contradicting what he is saying the whole time.
Both Clark and Cook use very descriptive language in their arguments, and if you
look at what they are saying you can see that the both hold strong concrete values about
what they are talking about, now if the values hold up to anything that is a different story.
Clark uses some descriptive language here, “It’s this hypocrisy and hatemongering as
demonstrated…” and you can see that his values lie in that he has strong view point
opposing Mr. Cook. Such as he believe that the bill passed in Indiana is a bill that has
merit and value to it itself (Mark Clark, 2015). Whereas Cook uses vivid words such as,
“religious objection.” One value that both of the men don’t hold in these arguments, is
respect. Yes they hold firm to who they are and what they believe, but both of the slam
on the opposing side instead of acknowledging that there may be some merit to their
values. Both fail to see the heart behind the opinion, but instead see the opinion alone.
If I have learned anything from both of these articles, its that when you are stating
what you believe in don’t infringe upon what someone else may believe. Instead put your
values out there but also note the values of the opposing side. Otherwise its just going to
create controversy. Mark Clark and Tim Cook both had some strong values, but both
failed to see the heart behind the values of the opposing side. I don’t ever want to fail to
see the heart behind some ones values even if its completely opposite from my views.
Works Cited
"Tim Cook, Apple CEO, Calls ‘religious Objection’ Laws Dangerous." Washington
Times. The Washington Times, n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2015.
Times, The Washington, and Mark Clark. "More Acts like Indiana’s Needed."
Washington Times. The Washington Times, n.d. Web. 02 Apr. 2015.