Apple blocks religious parody app as ‘offensive’ | iLounge News

News

Apple blocks religious parody app as ‘offensive’

Apple has rejected yet another iPhone and iPod touch application, Me So Holy, citing “objectionable content.” Similar to the developer Lil’ Shark’s prior photo manipulation app Animalizer, Me So Holy allows users to replace the face of a religious figure with any face from the iPhone’s camera or photo library, optionally adding text. On the product’s blog, the company writes, “Our question is, is religion really to be placed in the same category as these violent apps? Sex, urine and defecation don’t seem to be off-limits, yet a totally non-violent, religion-based app is. We feel that Apple is being too sensitive to its perceived user group and are disappointed that this otherwise creative, freethinking company would reject such a positive and fun application.” [via Silicon Alley Insider]

« PopCap launches Peggle for iPhone, iPod touch

Sony CEO: Open tech could have beaten Apple »

Related Stories

Comments

1

Ahhh, religion.  The all powerful, untouchable magic word.

Posted by Greg K. on May 11, 2009 at 8:17 PM (PDT)

2

if they are going to block this (freedom of speech) app then they should be blocking all the bible app’s. What about all the other apps that let you swap faces?

I’d love an app like this. i can’t stand religions they are controlling, greedy, judging, and are out for their own selfish wants. To control and influences everything. If this app was available I’d download it.

Posted by Johnny on May 12, 2009 at 6:16 AM (PDT)

3

Why in God’s name are people (especially Americans) so sensitive to upsetting religious supporters - over say believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster ..

Posted by M Clements on May 12, 2009 at 6:28 AM (PDT)

4

Monkey feces, urine, and fart joke apps abound, but a Jesus app is offensive?

LOL.

Posted by ChicagoTech on May 12, 2009 at 8:24 AM (PDT)

5

I think APPLe did the right. We don’t wanna get in trouble with an applicaiton that showes a muslim guy with a chicken head on top of it. It would be ofensive and the muslim world woulds hat us more.

So, I understand freedom of speech but also we have to be wise how we represent us. ... Apple did right in this case.

Posted by dennis on May 12, 2009 at 8:49 AM (PDT)

6

I love how people automatically jump to the ‘free speech’ chant. It is Apple’s software, hardware, and delivery (iTunes). they can reject any app for any reason they want, however they do provide terms as a basis. Also, I love the religion is greedy, judging, and selfish comment. And in that post the person shows his own greed, judgment, and selfishness, talk about irony.

Posted by Hydra-Calm on May 12, 2009 at 9:44 AM (PDT)

7

Personally, I am not particulary religious, but that still doesn’t give me the right to go about bad mouthing and disrespecting other people’s beliefs because it’s not my own. It’s all about respect and Apple made the right decision.

Posted by ahMEmon on May 12, 2009 at 9:58 AM (PDT)

8

“iFart on Mohammed”, anyone? No, I didn’t think so. Apple done good.

Posted by Gebus on May 12, 2009 at 11:19 PM (PDT)

9

What really upsets me about this is how religious propaganda make it through Apple’s “moral filter” untouched, yet apps like this get squashed. So by their logic an app that lets you put Rick Astley’s head on the Pope’s body is offensive but at the same time apps that tell you that you are a dirty sinner and are unworthy of your life unless you pray to a zombie are perfectly ok?

For example I purchased an app called “Dog Training Guide” and when I scrolled to the bottom I come across a chapter called “Is God Real?” Which goes on to proselytize about the bible. What does this have to do with Dog Training? Why is it allowed to be in the app? This is truly offensive, not a photoshopped picture of George Bush’s head on James Dobson’s body.

Posted by leftskidlow on May 14, 2009 at 8:39 PM (PDT)

10

leftskidlow, while I agree that the chapter about God has no place in the Dog app, but I cannot understand your logic. It is offensive to you that someone might believe in God, yet you do not see the offensiveness in mocking a person (dead or alive) that represents that religion. and I reiterate my earlier post that it is their software, hardware, and delivery; so they can disallow an app just because they don’t like it. If you don’t like it, buy 51% of Apple and make yourself CEO.

Posted by Hydra-Calm on May 15, 2009 at 9:39 AM (PDT)

11

Really, who cares about a Jesus app? If one really believes in Jesus deeply, then could anything so silly do any “damage” whatsoever?

There are scores of apps with violent content, but ANYthing that smacks of sexuality or religion (unless it’s the RIGHT religion with the RIGHT attitude) is fair game for banishment. So, violence is acceptable… just don’t shake a poor little baby. That’s such a twisted and set of mores!

My problem with religious items in the App Store is that there really needs to be a SEPARATE “Religion and Spirituality” section to cover all of it Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, Wicca, you name it. NONE of that stuff should be mixed in with “Lifestyle”, Education” or “Research”. They are. Check it out.

Personally, I think there’s room for ALL of it; sex, violence, farts and Jesus.

There’s a simple solution for all the nannies and scolds in the audience:
You no like, you no buy.

Posted by jeffharris on May 16, 2009 at 11:00 AM (PDT)

12

“Really, who cares about a Jesus app?”

I do. So do millions of others.

“If one really believes in Jesus deeply, then could anything so silly do any “damage” whatsoever?”

How easy the lessons of history are forgotten (wilfully it seems in this case). Human beings are deeply symbolic. You know what symbols are, don’t you? Stand-ins representing the real thing. A baby. Jesus. Mohammed. They all mean SOMETHING.

Those that do not understand this, will always think they’re entitled to mock without consequences. They’re not.

I sometimes wonder if there are certain people missing a social filter inside themselves, that allows them to think this way. I guess that’s why Apple and others have to step in to shake some sense into them.

Posted by Gebus on May 17, 2009 at 2:17 PM (PDT)

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy