Apple-Approved 'Anti-Gay' App Disappears From App Store

The Manhattan Declaration, a controversial app condemning gay marriage, sparked outrage when Apple approved the app for inclusion in its App Store, finding that it contained "no objectionable material."

Earlier this week, The Huffington Post wrote about the app, which critics have called "anti-gay" for "[boiling] LGBT people down to little more than deviant cretins." Several days later, the app was no longer available in the App Store, and it seems Apple has quietly removed the app. (We've contacted the creators of the app for a comment.)

The app's disappearance from the App Store comes after thousands signed an online petition asking Apple to remove the app. "Supporters of equal rights and the right of women to control their own bodies must stand together and say to Apple: 'Applications that support hate and division have no place in the iTunes Store,'" the petition's authors wrote.

The Manhattan Declaration invited users to add their signatures to a nearly 5,000-word long "declaration" authored by Christian clergy, among others, that "speaks in defense of the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious liberty." The app described itself as a "call of Christian conscience."

In 2008, Apple donated $100,000 to oppose the ban on gay marriage.

Do you think Apple should have removed the app? Weigh in below.

UPDATE: The creators of the Manhattan Declaration contacted HuffPostTech with the following statement, confirming that Apple had removed its app from the App Store:

Signers of the Manhattan Declaration are disappointed that Apple has pulled our app from its site. We were not notified by Apple that the app was being pulled—nor have we been told why—but the app quietly disappeared from the site over the holiday weekend.

Given that there are 300,000+ apps available, it is surprising to us that there couldn’t continue to be an app focused on the sanctity of human life, marriage as the exclusive union of one man and one woman and religious liberty—views that millions of Americans have in common. The Manhattan Declaration is written in respectful language, and it engages the beliefs of those who differ in an honest, thoughtful and civil manner. The document can be found at www.ManhattanDeclaration.org.

Yesterday, the original drafters of the Manhattan Declaration—Chuck Colson of the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, Robert George of Princeton University and Timothy George of Beeson Divinity School—faxed Steve Jobs a letter urging him, “in the spirit of civil discourse,” to reinstate the Manhattan Declaration app as soon as possible.

Comments

[jmdolphin]

11:26 AM on 12/02/2010

first i believe that being gay is not a culture, or a race, or a religion. it is a sexual preference. therefore does not receive that same rights. No one should attack, and hurt gays. However a religion has the right to say gay activity is a sin and not right. Apple pulling this app is just one more action that is not right. I personally am tired of apple controling actions with their apps and their need to control. I sold my Imac, and macbook last month. I will get a android phone or windows as soon as my contract is out with my iphone. Ipad??? no way!

[Sceth]

07:18 AM on 12/01/2010

I'd love it if Apple simply stops regulating its iTunes store altogether.

[Telemachus7]

09:56 PM on 11/30/2010

The sheer amount of hate put out towards Christians, who take a moral stand on issues such as the murder of unborn babies and sexuality, is amazing to see.

Does anyone oppose murder? Or pedophilia? Or thievery? Or rape? How hypocritical - you'll impose YOUR morals and YOUR viewpoints through law, but when a large section of the country wants to stand up and say this is morally wrong and unnatural, you dismiss them as simply bigots and haters. If you took your view points to their logical conclusions you couldn't have any laws, for all laws are based on moral priorities made by a society - for the US it's a Judeo-Christian morality that is prevalent.

It's the Western Judeo-Christian mindset that allowed religious freedom, freedom of speech, and democracy to all come into fruition. The idea that Christians are intrinsically opposed to art and music and all good things is absurd - go see who saved Western literature from the barbarians when Rome fell. The ignorance of the left is astounding, as is their intolerance and hate.

What if someone says they're born a murderer or born to love children sexually? Is that OK? Are you going to say, well...if you're born that way, it must be alright...no. Not in a million years. You'll protect your children from such depredations every time. Being born with a proclivity doesn't make it right.

[Kludgomatic]

02:55 AM on 12/01/2010

It would be troubling indeed to learn that others are imposing their morals and viewpoints on minorities whose lives have already been made dangerous enough, no? I think I should have to hate vehemently in return for some sense of justice.

[jmdolphin]

11:31 AM on 12/02/2010

not a minority but a sexual preference. putting gay activity in the same boat as race is huge jump in interpretation on your part. Jesus sat with the women at the well and gay people should not be hurt or harmed by Christians. However Christian should be able to believe gay activity is a sin.

[Sceth]

07:19 AM on 12/01/2010

We don't restrict murder because it's against morals. We restrict it because it is a practical hindrance to State interest. Homosexuality is not.

[Telemachus7]

01:54 PM on 12/01/2010

And this is where you are incorrect. All laws are based upon moral judgments. We know and consider murder to be wrong. (The government uses murder when it suits them - obviously it is no practical hindrance to them). We judge it immoral to do many things, and so we make laws to curtail such actions.

Those people firmly believe that homosexuality is an immoral thing. Guess what? That's their right and it doesn't make them bigots and filled with hatred. I'm pro-Civil Union for all myself. Take marriage out of the public realm and put it back where it began - in religious context. It'd solve the current debate nicely.

But to say because someone believes that a sexual orientation, which you may or may not be born with (which doesn't matter anyways to our culture - we don't seem to care if you're born a boy, you can become a girl) they're horrendous, civil rights enemies is ridiculous. Where is the right of a small minority to redefine terms? The leftist intolerance while claiming tolerance is disgusting.

Libertarianism in 2010!

[tonedef]

03:11 PM on 11/30/2010

The fact that the app even got approved is objectionable. Apple clearly has at least one b1got working in the app dept.

[Kludgomatic]

02:40 AM on 12/01/2010

The app is clearly objectionable, but this is a case of an employee simply checking off items on a list. Motives are not needed.

[Cynth Bage]

01:16 PM on 11/30/2010

I would not wish for an iPhone app to be as easy to distribute as, say, a FB app. But when something like this slips through the cracks, it is cause for deep concern.

[Brian Berneker]

11:20 AM on 11/30/2010

The question is not whether or not these apps can exist, but what Apple's role is in limiting them. On an openly accessible platform where people can install their own apps at will, like any PC or regular Mac, you can run any kind of application whatsoever, no matter how objectionable, because you OWN IT and you CHOOSE TO. It's called SOFTWARE.

The divisive issue with Apple on this is that they solely control what private individuals can and cannot install on their own personal device, and therefore play the role of censor. When DVD Jon first decrypted DVDs, his argument was that he had a right to play the DVD he bought on his Linux computer for which there was no other means to play it.

If the DOJ said that Apple had to make the device allow people to install their own apps in the "white market" (and not just than the Cydia "grey market" which is explicitly unsupported, indirectly deprecating competitor software outlets), say through a legitimate alternate App store, then freedom of choice would apply, but Apple has mandated full control of what apps you can install and are even able to DELETE THEM from your device, even after you've bought and paid for them.

Remember when Microsoft got in trouble for making their browser proprietary to the OS?

[apstorm]

02:23 PM on 11/30/2010

Delete them? To my knowledge, they cannot delete something from your device once you've installed it. They however can make it impossible to reinstall. There was a product that I used to use that was removed from the App Store by the creators as they decided to stop supporting it. I could have left the app on my phone. The creators even said that was fine, but wanted to make sure it was known it could not be reinstalled nor would it be kept up-to-date (which it needed to be to function properly) since they were removing it from the App Store. In the end, I found another app to fulfill the purpose and uninstalled the no-longer-offered app on my own, but it still functioned (albeit partially) even past the date when it was removed from the store.

Of course, if you have personally experienced an app disappearing from your device AND the App Store at the same time...

[carnitine]

10:55 AM on 11/30/2010

Thats whats great about Jail Breaking iPhones and places like Cydia. I wouldn't agree with a Nazi app but I wouldn't want it censored either. I wouldnt like the idea of someone deciding what software I can install on my computer. I view this as the same thing.

[JonDavidH]

10:16 AM on 11/30/2010

I suppose if you have an Anti-Gay application that could explode Pandora's box into many other annoying things. Then the Nazis would say "Well why can't we have an Anti-Semitic application"? Southern Confederates would say "Great, let's get that Anti-Black/Anti-Latino application in the works as well".

This is a somewhat far fetched but not entirely out of the realm of possibility: They could also use these applications to enhance communication between regional hate communities in different areas which will only serve to facilitate their operations management. It could be a vital cost-efficient instrument in aiding them in harassing people in and around their local communities.

[carnitine]

10:57 AM on 11/30/2010

Ok that is crazy. If a hate group wanted to communicate as you say do you REALLY believe banning this app is going to stop it!?

[Brian Berneker]

11:23 AM on 11/30/2010

So show me the list sites offering this plethora of hate apps for regular computers then
...or do people only hate on portable devices?

[2crudedudes]

11:40 AM on 11/30/2010

Well, I'm no computer scientist, but I doubt programming apps is a time- or effort-consuming as programming for a regular computer.

[JonDavidH]

12:18 PM on 11/30/2010

Let's just say here in NYC many gangs have been found to tweet about their illegal activities.

As dumb as that may sound, this should not be a surprise when it comes from people of that mentality.

Since tweeting is mobile and can serve as a communication forum to other criminals outside of the immediate vicinity, why can't the App in the Apple store serve the same purpose if not moderated?

Groups of youths in Japan have been known to organize suicide events solely using online communication forums and mobile applications. By using a mobile application (as opposed to texting and calling) one can increase anonymity while maintaining synchronicity with cohorts.

The answer is Yes eventually the cops will track you down but usually only if you are stupid enough to enable GPS/Location or explicitly type your location without using some sort of code.

[merrymico]

08:49 AM on 11/30/2010

How many gay customers does apple have? I would say many, and Apple should watch their step. Would hate to have a boycott just before CHRISTMAS!

[merrymico]

08:47 AM on 11/30/2010

Im surprised at Apple. They should be ashamed they let it get that far.

[Matthew Mirabile]

08:16 PM on 11/29/2010

The Huffington Post and and those who signed the petition to ban it are themselves fostering division and hatred by silencing views divergent from their own. And EVERYONE who wants to keep their right to express their point of view on anything should speak up and make their opinion known to Apple.

[kramereng]

02:05 AM on 11/30/2010

Apple's app store is a closed system meaning anything that is approved to be on there is implicitly endorsed by Apple (or can be viewed that way). If Apple feels an app is contrary to its company ethos or that it would tarnish their reputation (and thus their bottom line), then they are free to deny whatever app they want.

This isn't a first amendment issue since we're dealing with private actors. It's a matter of conscience and the actor that has the power in this situation chose to act on what they believe to be right. Beginning and end to the story.

[UC Sanity]

06:09 PM on 11/29/2010

This app, while obviously reprehensible, is part of free speech.
My main concern is that getting rid of this empowers the hatemongers and the people that crow endlessly about a growing discrimination against Whites and Christians in this country. Let ignorant people play with their apps, we probably can't change every Fundamentalists' opinions on this.

[JShankel]

08:41 PM on 11/29/2010

There is no free speech on the App Store.  It is private property.

[Hank10303]

10:31 AM on 11/30/2010

Denying  a vendor access to your customers, as Apple seems to want to do, now, does not violate anyone's free speech.  The company still has the right to sale their product, Apple just won't be among its distributors/retailers.  Free speech has nothing to do with a bad product, as this clearly is.

[UC Sanity]

01:50 PM on 11/30/2010

To both of you guys, I am definitely not condoning this, nor am I trying to justify it with free speech as so many hateful groups do.

What I mean is that it's not breaking any laws. It's a terrible thing, but removing it like this creates a controversy that only fuels these kinds of people.

[OMAguy]

05:01 PM on 11/29/2010

This qoute is the very first line in the preamble to their declaration.

"Christians are heirs of a 2,000-year tradition of proclaiming God's word, seeking justice in our societies, resisting tyranny, and reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering."

I'm confused on how oppressing the rights of gay people in marriage equality actually helps them resist oppression. How is foisting the tyranny of their religion on others actually helping resist tyranny?

[deweydecimal]

09:53 AM on 11/30/2010

I suppose they conveniently left out the part about the usurpation of Pagan rituals and anti-pagan pogroms, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the settlement of the New World and the Jesuit smallpox blankets, the meddling and positioning of European powers against each other, the silence and complicity during the Holocaust, the silence during the AIDS epidemic in Africa with 30 million infected now, the silence and obstruction of the child molestation and abuse scandal? Jesus wept.

[apstorm]

02:43 PM on 11/30/2010

Not that such things aren't horrifying, but aren't most/all of them attributed to specifically the Catholic church (particularly Vatican City political moves)? I thought Fundies were the big problem when it came to mistreatment of LGBT groups, not the Catholics. Catholicism generally plays loose with Biblical interpretation, since they generally understand the Bible isn't meant to be literal. Unlike Fundies who not only take things literally but take them out of context (whether it's on purpose or subconscious is up to interpretation). They both have their faults, but it helps to know and understand the differences.

[ChristiJi]

04:51 PM on 11/29/2010

So, Christians won't object to anti-christian software that promotes hatred against people of faith? People are allowed to think whatever they choose. And Christian language is very offensive seen from my point of view. Whatever your preferences, applications that promote widespread bigotry hurt our society. I'm glad Apple made the right decision.

[jonjon tha 5 8]

06:00 PM on 11/29/2010

Even if they didn't, it's not the same thing. Being gay actually ISN'T a choice - but making one's "religion" the excuse for one's own irrational bigotry against gay people most definitely IS.

[merrymico]

08:53 AM on 11/30/2010

Can I fan you for that comment?

[Bill J4321]

04:47 PM on 11/29/2010

How else are people supposed to remember that it is OK to deny civil rights to gay citizens unless there's an app for that?