The dude said I’m complicit if I don’t go out in the street and start murdering people.

Take your irrelevant bullshit elsewhere, fucking phony keyboard warriors.

No, I’m not complicit because I’m not a barely discriminate murderer.

Hearing a cop admitting wrong feels like a fantasy in the US

Vandalism was enough for them to outlaw the whole group? How many of those 744 were vandals?

Probably wouldn’t see the same with roles reversed

If I have change or a spare buck, I give it to them. I don’t care what they spend it on.

This small charity is making a global impact.

if we’re talking one-off transactions, this is no problem. You simply get enough crypto for your purchase and spend it. You don’t invest all of your money in it and you can circumvent the Visa/Mastercard garbage.

While that makes sense to logical people, there is a rabid right-wing movement in the US that in intent on defining any acknowledgment of LGBTQ+ is inherently “sexual”.

And how is casually referring to heterosexual relationships then not sexual?

I assume it doesn’t say because there are games with LGBTQ+ content that is sexual and ones where it is not.

“The internet has no borders. Women and girls everywhere are impacted by male violence against women and misogyny in general which we believed these games perpetuated,” she said.

Yet the fictional violence against men and boys is A-Ok!

The shibboleth in question

No, it’s not. Free speech protects what you say from the government, not your employer. Your employer ALSO has free speech, meaning they can decide what can and can’t be said on their property.

This is like saying Sesame Street doesn’t show hardcore porn and that’s a violation of free speech.

Oh so the thing that HASN’T HAPPENED is your counterargument?

Name it.

deleted by creator

“Free speech” doesn’t entitle you to dictate policy over privately held companies. We spent four years trying to convince Trumpers of this. Be smarter.

Why is this downvoted? It correctly point out what “free speech” actually means.

His free speech was never infringed. He can say what he wants and not be prosecuted for it. Whether or not he has a job isn’t covered by the First Amendment.

Wrong. It opposed Naziism and Soviet Union misinformation. Since then it’s been a standard journalism outlet that, by law, could not be dictated by US politicians.