Why not? He said himself that this gave him a deeper understanding of the struggles of minority groups:
Being gay has given me a deeper understanding of what it means to be in the minority and provided a window into the challenges that people in other minority groups deal with every day.
I think it is relevant to the discussion, because I believe that this is a much deeper motivation than profit maximization. Though, there are of course many other ways to reach the conclusion that privacy is important.
If your opinion is that his orientation influenced/drove his ideals and motivations, it's relevant to mention. I don't think the gp is arguing that's the only way to have those ideals.
In a perfect world it wouldn't be, because it wouldn't make a difference.
Although things are better these days than there were, there is not complete equality - and I am not speaking legally.
There is no need to "come out" to your friends and family that you are straight and like girls (if you are male and vice versa).
Until there is no bigotry, until there is literally no difference in what sex you prefer, then something like this will have an effect on your life, thus it may have played a part in Tim's view regarding his current position.
He(or she) literally said why in his(or her) post.
If you are part of a group for which discrimination is very real, then you naturally value privacy laws much more.
Being gay has given me a deeper understanding of what it means to be in the minority and provided a window into the challenges that people in other minority groups deal with every day.
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-10-30/tim-cook-s...
I think it is relevant to the discussion, because I believe that this is a much deeper motivation than profit maximization. Though, there are of course many other ways to reach the conclusion that privacy is important.