Apple has reportedly banned an anti-abortion app from the App Store after complaints were made about it from “left-wing bloggers.”
Among the features of the Human Coalition app is a “Prayer Feed,” where users can access a real-time map of the United States, allowing them to join in with the prayers of other users on behalf of “abortion-determined families.”
Anti-abortion group Human Coalition claims that, when Apple first removed the app, the company said it was due to functionality problems. However, when Human Coalition spoke with Apple representatives, they demonstrated that the app actually exceeded minimum requirements and “functioned better than similar apps from other developers.”
“There is a growing trend in the U.S. to attempt to deter or silence Americans who oppose the fatal discrimination against preborn children,” Brian Fisher, co-founder and president of Human Coalition, told Fox News. “This move by Apple is not surprising, though it is a deep disappointment. Human Coalition remains committed to providing compassionate, loving care to women and their children even in the face of these challenges.”
The Apple ban hammer
Since launching the App Store in 2008, Apple has periodically faced criticism due to its curated App Store and a sometimes inconsistent approach to banning apps.
Apple seems to have no hard-and-fast rules that govern exactly what is and isn’t permissible in the App Store (Apple apparently subscribes to former Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart’s famous view of obscenity — “I know it when I see it“). As a result, the company and its developers run into these sorts of problems every so often.
When it comes to the subject of abortion, Apple ran into problems with pro-abortion rights activists following a Siri-related issue in 2011. When users asked Siri to show nearby facilities that offer abortion services, Apple’s AI assistant instead directed people toward adoption centers. Apple changed this in 2016.
The Human Coalition app is still available on the Google Play Store.
Luke Dormehl is a U.K.-based journalist and author, with a background working in documentary film for Channel 4 and the BBC. He is the author of The Apple Revolution and The Formula: How Algorithms Solve All Our Problems … and Create More, both published by Penguin/Random House. His tech writing has also appeared in Wired, Fast Company, Techmeme and other publications.
35 responses to “Apple comes under fire for banning anti-abortion app”
Good. About as useful as fart apps.
Republicans: Pro-life until you talk about guns and pro-small government until you talk about your body…
Democrats: Caring, all-inclusive, non-judgmental, progressive, anti-hate, anti-bigotry until a non-Democrat is in the White House.
Doesn’t the constitution allow guns? And doesn’t the law state are not allowed to kill another person aka pro-life?
Democrats, against the constitution and law, period.
Democrats aren’t anti-guns…… they’re for gun control…. No legislation change would impact any non-mentally disabled person, or basically non-criminal from attaining a gun.
More gun control isn’t going to help.
A case study is South Africa which has way more strict gun control. It has about 10% of the population of the US, around 9 times less guns per 100 capita and yet South Africa has a gun murder total 3 times more than the US.
Fact is, criminals break the law, so why would they suddenly start prescribing to more gun control. They won’t and South Africa is proof.
Democrats – Always pushing to punish everyone that didn’t commit the crime.
Yeah, except for those who’d categorize conservatism as mental disability or criminality. Absolutely predictable, “sure as shootin’.”
>>Democrats aren’t anti-gun
They are, in fact. The platform of the democrat party is the revocation of all private guns. This is due to the wishes of their financiers.
>No legislation change would impact any non-mentally disabled person, or basically non-criminal from attaining a gun.
lol, every single piece of legislation they’ve ever passed on guns has done exactly that
as usual another interesting interpretation of the 2nd amendment ignoring half of it. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Where’s your well regulated militia? Do you go out for firing exercises together and practice formations?
As usual, an interesting misunderstood interpretation of the US 2nd amendment.
The regulated militia is the government kiddo, the arms is to protect you against the government.
Clearly you can’t read either…
Garath…you are arguing with people that have given up reason and ignore truth and facts. Lawrence Tribe, the honored liberal jurist and legal scholar set out to write a book proving the 2nd Amendment didn’t apply to individuals…only a ‘militia.’ After years of research including a grammatic study, the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers and numerous writings and discussions from the people involved at the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights, he could come to no other conclusion than the 2nd Amendment is a uncompromising ban on the government regulating arms of any kind for both individuals and the militia. I find most leftist are not intellectually honest, like David here. Happy to see that Lawrence Tribe values truth over politics and proved he is intellectually honest.
Maybe you should read the US Supreme Court’s decision on this very fact – they agreed that it was an individual right not a collective right. So to put it in the simplest of terms for you – “no well regulated militia” required.
Except even liberal staticians have admitted the proliferation of guns have no statistically significant impact on the rate of murder in our country. And in many cases help decrease the rate of crime. But that goes against your narrative. :(
And sorry we want a government that’s big enough to say murder is illegal. O_o
What statistician would that have been? Surely not from Australia where banning guns erased mass shootings…
Yeah and skyrocketed home invasions ;) and didn’t do crap to the murder rate. But hey at least people don’t die by gun when murdered. As if that’s somehow qualitatively different.
Explain to me how a gun locked in a safe protects you, or make a case that a gun more likely to accidentally injure you than successfully defend you makes you safer.
Because people don’t fudge with people who have guns. They fudge with people who have no defenses. I know this is really hard for you to comprehend. You liberals love to control others.
But it’s whatever if the 2nd A is ever banned this country will truly reach the boiling point for a 2nd civil war… and guess who will have all the guns? lmao
so by your logic, a sign outside your house that says “don’t mess with me I have guns in my house” would serve the same purpose…. We like to control others? This whole debate started because you have an inability to let women decide how to plan for their families…. Again, it’s not about banning the 2nd amendment….. it’s about regulating private shows, stopping people who can’t travel on an airplane from getting a gun, stopping mentally ill people from getting a gun, not you…… jesus christ.
You just have to laugh at these liberal idiots. I quote David above, “Surely not from Australia where banning guns erased mass shootings…”
Let’s show conclusively how ignorant and stupid David is. Go research how many mass shootings they had prior to the ban. Go Google it….sure, I know you won’t because you abhor truth and anything that doesn’t support your misguided agenda. The answer…ONE…yes, they had one mass shooting. To say the ban prevented more is just propaganda based on nothing but your own ignorant feelings.
I wish we could have an honest discussion about these topics, but that is impossible. When your opponent has abandoned reason and will not hear anything that doesn’t agree with them, honest discussion is not possible. The only recourse left is to defeat them. The American people are currently carrying out the elimination of liberal idiots which started with the GOP taking the House and Senate. Trump was the next step and currently, the Democrats hold the fewest elected positions in 150 years. The mainstream media, nor the left will admit to it, but they are loosing badly and the 2018 election is looking like a continuation of this purge. The left is loud, obnoxious and likes to pretend they are the majority. Truth is, they are weak, powerless and on the wrong side of every moral argument going on. The American People have rejected them completely…they just won’t shut up long enough to hear the news.
Wow you’re pathetic. My favorite part was how you didn’t speak to any actual fact and spouted opinions for 3 minutes.
My favorite part is how you yourself don’t provide any facts, only opinions and then go on to criticize Jerry for same. Notice any hypocrisy there?
What it is about, David, is full due process including the presumption of innocence versus the Kafkaesque hamstringing of formerly-free people. E.g., would those on a no-fly list have been adjudicated disqualified for firearm possession through an adversarial (lawyered) court proceeding before being stripped of their fundamental right to effective self-defense? No. May the state oversee and forbid familial gifts, bequests, and transactions? Evidently you think so.
Perhaps well-intention but very far off base.
(1) There is no need to regulate private guns shows. The widely touted Liberal point of the “gun show loophole” simply does not exist. There are laws aplenty that cover all forms of transactions related to firearms, including those sold a gins shows; (2) Stopping people on the No fly list from getting a gun – There are already laws that cover this as well and they are very succinct. Plus, the No-Fly list is notorious for its inaccuracies but again it wouldn’t matter since the laws exist to prevent a criminal from legally obtaining a weapon; (c) Once again, existing laws are very clear that anyone who has been adjudicated as mentally incompetent, convicted of any felonies, uses controlled substances, purchases for someone other than themselves, is banned from purchasing. Yes they can lie – that’s what criminals do. Criminals will always find a way to obtain an illegal device or firearm – that’s the whole point. Adding laws only impacts the law-abiding population, but Liberals just don’t get that.
The Supreme Court has ruled. If you think you know better than the scholars that made the decisions to uphold the US Constitution’s Second Amendment as an individual right, why not bring your own case the the SC and argue your point with them? Yeah, I didn’t think so…
You do realize the % of gun deaths annually due to “mass shootings” is extremely small right ?
how does not allowing people on a do not fly list and mentally disabled people to get a gun negatively impact you? Cars didn’t use to have seatbelts….
You need to ask someone that’s making that claim. Sure they did. Your mothers arm ;)
You’ve only got to remove the guns from the criminals and gangs. Your average citizen, whether ‘murican or educated, really isn’t the problem. A 10 year mandatory for any felon in possession of a firearm would be a good start. Mass shootings are in significant to home invasions and other criminality. While these predators insist on taking and raping, a citizen should absolutely have the right to execute a hoodlum on the spot.
Corporations are cowards who would sooner bend to the whims of political activist groups than stand on the principle of free speech, and their self-professed love of diversity. Apple has revealed its liberal, pro-abortion bias numerous times. After riots in Charlottesville, Virginia, CEO Tim Cook announced his company’s $1 million plus two-for-one matching donation to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which labels pro-marriage and family organizations ‘hate groups.
Every liberal supports banning, but some day something you care about will be banned.
This is troubling. No matter what your belief is on abortion, the fact that Apple is taking a side and disallowing apps from people with ideologies they don’t don’t agree with is outrageous.
Apple should have an open, DIVERSE ecosystem of apps from people with different beliefs and opinions.
Diversity is only our strength if it conforms to liberal delusions.
Liberals are ruining everything with their narrow minded view of free speech.
Apple should be able to do exactly what they want on their platform. If you don’t like it, tough.