OH NO NO NO

To be honest here, when I have kids in a couple of years, I hope it will be girls who can then go and exploit beta and omega males online in their future.

Only retards have kids

Dicks getting punished for being dicks will never cease to amuse me.

Findom is a thing in modern capitalism, so...

>Spoiling a kids movie in a videogame warrants serious consequenses
I smell rice

They're right you know, imagine being so pathetic as to do something like that

Op B T F O

Wizard please

Ok schlomo

SEETHING

what piece of legislation gives companies the right to withhold something I paid for because I spoiled a children's film

>getting upset because you had your super heroes punching each other movie spoiled for you
imagine being this gay lmao

Attached: 1420381934008.jpg (309x309, 20K)

>marvel
>"""cinema"""

The terms of service that you agree too when you install the game, it is still kikery imo

>pay for a video game
>get prevented from playing said video game by the games publisher
This is illegal you know.

Attached: EA68188B-181F-4703-BABD-A19092E4146C.jpg (2228x1539, 240K)

That shit only holds up in the US

ToS aren’t legally binding

That'd be the "terms of service" one is confronted with when they play most multiplayer video games on the consumer market (and on most things on the internet that involve interacting with other human beings). Let's break down the terminology there - Terms of Service. You're paying for a "service". However, there are "terms" you must tacitly agree to to partake. If you fail to live up to those terms, then you are allowed to be denied service, per your own agreement.

I'm not here to debate whether or not those Terms are correct or not, but the person who received the message in the OP certainly agreed to them. Undeniable fact.

A companies terms of service do not trump the law of the land you gigantic bootlicking faggot.
Oh wait...

Attached: 1458344073112.gif (360x203, 1.63M)

>ToS aren’t legally binding
tell that to the most censored man in US history

Attached: super male vitality kicks in.png (640x329, 293K)

t. Butthurt incel because laws attack his retarded vision of basedness

I've got it pretty bad when it comes to women but holy fuck how pathetic do you have to be to actually pay a girl to pretend to be your online gf for an hour without even getting to touch her. If I'm paying you I at least want a bj

>say word
>goods stolen

nothing was stolen, you can still access the game data even if you're banned

>temporary ban for being kind of an asshole
Why are you so mad? sounds fair and square to me

leftist faggot

her eyes look like they're on upsidedown

This is what you get for playing online only games, which have the biggest argument for binging TOS. The game as a service model is a joke.

Enjoy practice with bots. You did this to yourself for playing garbage games and blindly signing the dotted line on your TOS.

>bongland

you mean pakistan/india where all blizz CS is

Was his copy of the game stolen? Nope. Still in his library and can probably still play offline.

That’s literally the opposite of being left? Kids on here these days.

>yes have more kids, we need them to grow up and die for israel!

>Whilst you may feel that spoiling a "kids" movie isn't bad, please remember that this is the end result of 22 movies, 10 years of cinema. Not your run of the mill film, many people have invested years into this so it being spoiled is not the type of behaviour we welcome in our games.

Attached: 1273092.png (345x337, 189K)

Humanity needs a nuclear winter

>punished for typing words
>not left
?

Authoritarianism is and will always be righty shit. Literally the idea of big brother. Modern news cycle has rotted your brain kido.

It's pretty much conservative fascism.

>The Right never punishes you for typing mean words.
Really? How brainwashed are you?

Imagine being this mad.

>getting upset because you can't play shooty-shooty with your classmates for 1 week
just imagine lol

>It's my right to spoil movies for private citizens on a privately owned platform! REEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hahaha get fucked.

Nice projecting

>did you just spoil Endgame in my overwatch game you fucking nazi INCEL

Attached: destiny autism.gif (206x139, 1.82M)

Nigger, stop conflating political spectrums with political groups.

Attached: 1555741110782.jpg (255x246, 11K)

Honestly these prices aren't even that bad. $20 for an hour is chump change if you're at the level where you'd be paying some thot to pretend to be your girlfriend.

yeah all those leftists banned from youtube, kikebook and twitter. it's like mccarthyism 2.0

Liberal left is literally all about freedoms.
By Your own logic banning trannies is a lefty thing

It's like he's young enough to not have his first civics or government class yet.

The removal of disinformation is apolitical. Get fucked, brainlet.

>Whilst you may feel that spoiling a "kids" movie isn't bad, please remember that this is the end result of 22 movies, 10 years of cinema. Not your run of the mill film, many people have invested years into this so it being spoiled is not the type of behaviour we welcome in our games.

Attached: 130402366-352-k54890.jpg (352x550, 25K)

See

Attached: images.jpg (461x665, 84K)

Yes, because communists in eastern Europe were not doing that for good part of 20th century.

I support unlimited term abortions for people who spoil Endgame. Each (You) I get is another signature for my change.org petition. Please support my movement for clear and positive change.

Also those are private companies? Or do you not believe in capitalism? This also protects your freedom from having to make gay wedding cakes. Did that blow your brain?

>see this leftist hasbara
no thanks :^)

Attached: 1554458402627.jpg (1001x652, 248K)

>I hate thinking so here's some dumbshit random clickbait article I have saved.
Really is a mystery how America got suckered by a used car salesman. Can't imagine how it happened.

Private company. Make your own Twitter then faggot I like my capitalism.

Not everyone is a burgerclap.
Although we would benefit if Americans stopped having kids, yes.

>inb4 some vague statement about how these companies were subsidized with tax money so we own them but somehow this doesn't apply to shit like big telecom companies, Walmart, oil companies, banks, etc.

private companies that hold the monopoly on digital social outlets, i.e. de facto public spaces, do not have the right to infringe on users' free speech

Redpilled post

yeah instead they should elect antiwhite socialists like those enlightened europeans and australians do

Hahahahaha they are not public spaces you dork and have not been defined as such by any landmark legal decision I'm aware of. But sure, if you say they are public spaces I'm sure the shareholders would be glad to let their money dissolve.

20 bucks doesn’t seem near worth it if I were her imo

You're using their private platform where they can decide what is correct use of it. It's not even real speech, it's a communication system.

>Leftshits take away a product you purchased using the fruits of your labor because you said 'HateSpeech™'

History in nutshell.

Aww someone spoiled your capeshit for you...

I'll take some hardcore Black Panther BLM communist terrorists over whoever you like. At least then you'll really have something to cry about.

That's literally not what happened. He was banned for spoiling the end of a movie.

Can pol even read?

>t. 16 year olds who are ready for their vacation from the world of Overwatch
Post your ban screens when it happens, freedom fighters.

Yikes

Attached: caa7396d97037cab6c3cfe0266a91bb1-xl.jpg (840x672, 70K)

>i love niggers!
just be honest

Blizzard has sued people for breach of contract for breaking ToS before.
t. named John Doe

calm down
have a drink

Attached: destiny soylent.gif (168x108, 2.91M)

Hey man I didn't even say they should also rape you and your white family in their African Superiority FEMA camps. I only thought it.

I do man. I really do. I love that they ruin your day when you see them. I love that you have deep fears that they will fuck that girl you're crushing on, and I love when you drop a pornstar from your fap rotation because she's been blacked. I love that those fucking apes live in a cage in your head, free of charge, and I think you love them too.

Proof?

just going to drop this here on the digital sidewalk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama

>"Today (June 19), the justices unanimously held that states can’t broadly limit access to social media because cyberspace “is one of the most important places to exchange views.”
>S T A T E S

Wow man, it's like in the first paragraph. Why the fuck are rightoids so fucking illiterate?

You clipped that article in an interesting place... Basically the ruling says platforms can't ban large swaths of people, in this case it was banning sex offenders from using social media. It has no bearing on banning people who violate TOS.

Here's a tricky question for you faggot, Is a corporation allowed to regulate and create rules that deviate from the constitutional rights you have as a citizen? Answer one way or the other and you have a leftist position.
>freedom of speech
>freedom of a private industry
>both leftist positions, one social one economic

AGAIN STOP CONFLATING POLITICAL SPECTRUMS AND POLITICAL GROUPS

Attached: hmmm.jpg (600x607, 31K)

Attached: you.jpg (639x439, 20K)

Imagine typing out your cuck fantasies hoping to "trigger" someone. Stop watching porn and have sex

private companies may not violate their country's laws

need civilization to fall apart so you can go back to clubbing thots and dragging them to the breeding cave, that way we will all finally have sex

>Only Americans spent tax dollars and lives in the middle east

I guess you aren't European either

Take it the Supreme Court my man. Surely you'll win.

Yeah that means the company can't not allow you to use it for no reason
You still can get banned for tos violation.

Incorrect. If you say something offensive to a business owner, they are within their rights to eject you from their premises. You do not have "First Amendment" protections from the wishes of the property owner. Ironically this is also the same reason that gay cake shit was a crock.

>play as a female character
>men give you stuff

>their country's laws
I thought you weren't American?

Thank you. What insane world are we living in where conservatives are actively promoting government interference in business?

You sound like you are already taking it up the ass from someone like you

>tfw you argue paragraphs long because you got tempo banned from a property
Thanks capitalism

>end of some fairy tale is relevant to completely unrelated industry and warrants leftshits preventing you from using paid for products

Reminder that piracy is only logic way forward.

That's kind of like paying a hooker to stand next to you for good luck while you play roulette except she contributes to losses and you don't even get laid at the end.

The sole reason why anyone would argue against this petty issue is because they feel personally attacked firstly because they hate capeshit and secondly because they feel their liberty as a human bean is attacked.
Even if they are in the terms "wrong" It's only a natural reaction to try and argue your way out of this bullshit

So waht exactly is overwatch

It's the current state of the conservative party. They're massive hypocrites that do shit like say they're for family values, then try to cover up sex crimes like prostitution and pedophilia. Say they're for small government but support politicians that actively engage in crony capitalism that bloats the deficit and builds an industry of war. Try arguing with any of them about the size of the military, see where it gets you. Maybe one day some "true conservative" will start kicking their asses out of power, but I doubt it. GOP's a zombie at this point.

>vacation from the world of Overwatch
Implying that I am stupid enough to pay for product when I find out that there is a single progressive within a company.

A source of high quality models that pornographic 3D film makers use to generate erotic content.

when twitter, kikebook and jewgle control as much of the internet as they do, they do not have the right to control who is heard and who is not. they are not private clubs with defined spaces and borders. if they want to control their users' speech then they need to give up their monopolies

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you in the wrong thread? OPs image is what we're all referencing.

whos tony stark and why did he die?

Obviously the user base had an outcry so they changed the terms of service to fit such circumstances, because you know, the customer is king, or in this case the majority of costumers.
It's only logical to suit your property for the majority of consumers, regardless of the issue
That's how business works

>Authoritarianism is and will always be righty shit.

no it isn't.

right wing extremism is libertarianism.

left wing extremism is communism.

leftards just scream fascist at everything they don't like.

>They gotta do what I say because reasons!
Well first you'll have to explain how these platforms are real monopolies. Is it possible for them to shut down their competitors, other than by being the best product on the market for their consumer base? Is there a limited amount of real estate online that any of these companies have effectively captured and are keeping walled off, or have they just built large networks for their own use?

You would be extremely, extremely hard pressed to prove any of those companies are actual, real monopolies. The fact that a majority of people use them doesn't make them a monopoly. That would be ridiculous and very anti-capitalist.

These are all great opinions, and I actually may agree. The current law does not however. The good news is you can change laws. But you and your kind probably will not because posting outrage on an anime board is about the apex of your ability.

good, faggot deserved it.

Europe isn't a country you disabled cunt

>right wing extremism is libertarianism.
How many brain cells do I need to lose before I think this? I'm just gonna start drinking everything under the sink until I get there.

>By Your own logic banning trannies is a lefty thing

transgenderism is a form of self harm.

>abloobloo muh capekinoooooo

Attached: 1555530977590.png (287x425, 124K)

Correction
Authoritarian left extreme is communism
Libertarian right extreme is capitalistic liberty (which is the issue in this very case)
Libertarian left extreme is human liberty
And authority right is fascism

You change the definition of the political compass to suit your agenda

This desu
As someone who loves reading books and watching film, having an anticipated book/film spoiled is far worse than getting called a nigger or something like that.

sorry you're always angry, DCuck

Right in terms of political spectrum. That's all we've been saying here. Don't get so defensive. And extreme left is probably anarchism, extreme right is authoritarianism or fascism. Libertarian is actually left. Once again... This is political spectrum not political identity. Go open your textbook.

yeah that's why it's entirely leftists demanding censorship while the only people that support free speech are on the right.

>the galaxy brain leftists in this thread.

Why do you do this? Right and left are not loaded words you fuck. Your politcal group, along with every other one has left and right positions. Authoritarianism has a socially right and a possible right/semi left economic system. LEFT AND RIGHT ARE NOT POLITICAL GROUPS. Stop.

Based t/v/ poster

Love it when leftists suddenly become the biggest advocates for free market principles like the right for business to exclude when the subject in question are major corporations and media giants.

So?
Banning me from doing whatever the fuck I want with my own body is anything but liberty.
The lefts liberty let's people be drug addict, self destructive trannies because that's human liberation.
Banning selfharm is authoritarian

who cares. that's pathetic. amerifats need to CHILL about their blockbuster crap.

>left/right dichotomy
worthless outside of divide & conquering regular people. one day you'll realize ideology doesnt matter unless you're a rootless, transnational elite trying to subvert a nation.
the fact is both the left and the right establishments want mass immigration (a nation killer), just for different reasons. ever wonder why the right doesnt do anything to actually stop abortions and big government? it is now legal to kill born babies in some states.
work on setting up a decent home and community (move to where people aren't plugged into poz culture and get to know your neighbors) and none of it will touch you when the time comes. it's all a big smoke screen and you've fallen for it.

Anarchism is extreme right but as a political ideology it has been co-opted by jews that have twisted it to a synonymy for communism.

looks like the Yea Forumsirgins are here to defend their shitty video game
the fact that Yea Forums is the only board that doesn't support piracy always makes me laugh

Where does it say in the TOS that I cant spoil a movie?

>living as your true self is self harm
Erm. No mate.

>You change the definition of the political compass to suit your agenda

99% of people consider Libertarianism as right wing.

>digital social outlets, i.e. de facto public spaces
lmao, you fucking boomer.

>yeah that's why it's entirely leftists demanding censorship while the only people that support free speech are on the right.
That's funny, because it seems like the right wingers in this very thread are trying to actively police the free speech of corporations by insisting they platform content they do not like or agree with for vague and unlawful, unconstitutional reasons. Guess we're in crazy upside down world now huh?

Literally only here to show righties how braindead and clueless they are
Simple as

most TOS say they can ban or remove you from their content for any reason. Obviously they're not going to do it for ANY reason because then no one would play their game

I'm a libtard and I totally agree with you. But we're actively seeing both sides be absolute hypocrites. Guess it's human nature. Thank fuck for laws right?

Anarchism is far left and always had been. A system like Anarcho capitalism is basically an alternatively structured form of Feudalism.

>99% of Americans consider Libertarianism as right wing.
Fixed that for you.

>ever wonder why the right doesnt do anything to actually stop abortions
I don't really understand the anti abortion movement in the US since blacks and mexicans get the most abortions. If they were illegal there would be a lot more criminals the way I see it

classical liberalism is libertarianism. neo-liberalism is socialism

If we're supposed to live in a society where corporations have the right to free speech (Citizens United) then that's how it is. That's not even a leftist stance.

Socially Left and Economically Right. You are correct. Actually it would be better to say socially down and economically right since a chart would outline it better.

should bakers be forced to give patronage to gay people?

Yes. Much like restaurants should be forced to give patronage to minorities.

thats the irony of it, it helps stem the tide but ultimately it won't matter because demographics. it's insanely evil and something like 44 million babies are aborted every year.
>It took 10,000 years for Men to kill a billion people. It took women 50 years to kill 1.2 billion people.

Got any proof to back that up? Or is it asstalk.
Purely ideology seen, from a point unaffected by the current, left liberty is the hippy spiritual human liberty
This is fact

True story, I used to think so until I realized how it would work on the flip side. I can admit when I'm wrong.

You therefore have a leftist position on certain economic rights

so gays have a legal right to private businesses, but people who believe in right wing ethics don't?

Unfortunately this is what happens when the political climate turns more towards a war-like mentality. Principles only make one's side disadvantaged while pragmatism serves your interests far better.

blizzard is obsessed with this shit because they want to make a cinematic universe thing for overwatch, which is hilarious because the game is trash and predicated on porn for its popularity. Perhaps they should let studio FOW make it?

Attached: 1534511938030.png (471x631, 468K)

Maybe because you only read Harry Potter trash that people is only invested because of 'le ebin plot'. Western canon is studied before being read most of the time but you don't see people crying because the teacher said Achilles dies. The reason: It is actually good and interesting not just for the plot.

many such cases! good for you, most people just keep pretending it makes sense for ideological reasons.

imagine still playing overwatch

>I want daughters who are esluts

Based retard poster

>living as your true self
>I was born in wrong body
>gender is a social construct

Run to /qa/ to bitch about toxicity.

>kill me in the video game
>go to jail

Yes please

Yes. Should bakers be forced to make gay cakes? No. Normal sale or service should not be denied so long as it does not violate the business owner's own first amendment rights. A gay person can order a cake. A gay person cannot force a business owner to tacitly approve of something against their religious beliefs by producing a product that "promotes" that ideal, in the same way that I can't force a company to print up shirts about how much I love rape, but I, as a man who loves rape, can order regular, non-rape endorsing t-shirts. It's not complicated.

Not the person you are responding to, who said people who believe in right wing ethics don't have legal right to private businesses, you giant strawman building faggot?

you wouldnt know unless you live here but we take television and films very seriously, its the only thing distracting from the wagecuck life

>playing overwatch
IMAGINE

You are anti human liberty

Why do 4channarians turn everything into a game of chicken? Imagine if they see a sign at the park that says "Do not litter". So they go up to a trashcan, remove the lid and dump garbage everywhere. Then people see it and tell them to stop. But the double down and move onto a second can. The more people that tell them to stop, the more they resist and litter. By this point they've put so much effort into being a shithead that it would be silly to stop. So the just keep doing it until someone applies enough force to make them stop.

I just don't get the mindset. It takes way more effort to be a dick than to just not do it in the first place. You don't gain anything from it. You're not using free speech or liberty for anything good. You're turning your personal freedom into a weapon to attack others and call it virtue. You start to define yourself in opposition to everything decent. It's just sad. Blizzard won't go out of business because you spoiled Endgame. Trump's not going to punish them for banning you. It's amazing you think this is some kind of grand protest against PC culture or rules or something. And it's not even like you stand by your actions. When people fight back you start whining like a wounded animal. Suddenly you want society to have compassion and empathy when you showed none earlier. How long do you think this can continue?

where is the strawman?
people who believe in left wing ethics tend to agree that yes, bakers should be forced to make gay cakes, and that free speech doesn't extend to right wingers (because "hate speech isn't free speech"), therefor they should stop complaining about politically biased deplatforming. have you been living under a rock?
>create your own platform
yeah, just give up on that huge audience for a small bunch of wignats on Gab so you can preach to the choir, bros :^)

>trannies
>human
never happened

No, they should just put it in their TOS and throw the degenerates out.
And thanks to the efforts of leftshit activists who keep suing the same guy over and over again, IF it lands on the supreme courts table one more time, they WILL have to do away with a lot of anti-discrimination laws.

>Yes
> Should bakers be forced to make gay cakes? No
wedding cakes ARE a normal service. ironically, you cannot eat your cake and have it. your beliefs are in direct contradiction.

I don't know who this Yea Forums fella is but he sounds BASED

Actually that has more to do with overall belief that private property owners have particular rights with their property. In this case it isn't about violating a corporations right to speech but violating their right as property owners to do what they like with their property including excluding others from access even on grounds that essentially violate THEIR freedom of speech.

However property rights only make sense if it's absolutely. Since at least the Civil Rights act, that has not been the case and so while we are in such a condition it makes no sense to be firmly principled on the matter when it comes to saying what a business can or cannot do. Because at this point it's just a selective 'principle' that we are using for politicle purposes.

That seems a bit turned arou d from the simpler compass.
I prefer left v right x authoritarian v libertarian

Attached: 1525844174473.jpg (1771x1938, 168K)

How is this legal lol
I hope they get shot up

>they WILL have to do away with a lot of anti-discrimination laws.
>I AM PSYCHIC!

Make cakes, not gay cakes. That's why the supreme court ruled in favor of the bakery. They were asked to make a cake that was explicitly expressing an ideology and not just a regular wedding cake. Otherwise they would have been ruled against.

>cinema

iron man gets raped by thanos and hulk dabs on his corpse

imagine being this much of a raging faggot that, not only do you watch capeshit, you get salty on the behalf of a 3. party you'll never meet having spoiled aforementioned capeshit for yet another party you'll never meet.

Only faggots and retards play overwatch and watch capeshit.

Good sum up.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I am full for leftists pumping their offspring full of carcinogenic hormones and castrating them, I am against government penalizing anyone who don't want to give standing ovations to the filth.

>WANTING to get cucked
He found the solution...

Attached: 1548338266085.jpg (600x681, 74K)

>your beliefs are in direct contradiction.
Not at all. If the wedding cake was to feature, in some way, an explicit symbolism of a gay union, then it could fall within a violation of the business owner's free speech. Whether that's two top pieces of the same gender or what have you, it doesn't matter. If the wedding cake were just a simple, normal wedding cake, then yes, the bakery would in fact be unlawful in its denial of service. If it looked like any other cake, then there is no reason to deny the cake, and instead this would be a matter of bigotry/discrimination.

Didn't read any of that. Fuck off back to r3ddit and kys, fag

This isn't a free speech thing, it's a property rights thing, and that (as an absolute principle) has been violated a long long time ago. Anyone who cited this right today is either ignorant of the actual state of property rights today, or they are just cynically using it as a justification for corporations to act in a way that serves their own political interests (like de platforming their political opponents).

>buying Blizzard games
>playing Blizzard games
Wait, this isn't Yea Forums

violence is not okay. Strong disavow, my friend!
if you're forced by a court to make a wedding cake for a gay couple, then you have been forced to make a gay cake. that's a political bias. i'm not sure what you're taking issue with.

Arya Stark's dad
killed by the Jews

This, sub 80 IQs BTFO

>If the wedding cake was to feature, in some way, an explicit symbolism of a gay union
the feature is there: it's a cake for a gay couple. it doesn't magically become a gay cake just because you draw two dicks on it; it's already gay.
i'm afraid you are engaging in mental gymnastics.
also, it's freedom of association, not free speech. the bakers were forced to support gay marriage against their will.

>agree to the terms of agreement
>never read them
Seems like you are in need of some consumer protection LMAO

im pretty sure the people whining about bans are the ones seething.

>cars purchased by gay people are gay cars, homes purchased by gay people are gay homes, cakes purchased by gay people are gay cakes.
You are one dumb-ass faggot.

>t.retard who wasn't paying attention the last time it when the Supreme court did literally all it could to toss this hot potato to the court of lower instance.

>rent video game from developers (yes, this is what you're doing)
>get surprised when developers decide you're abusing it and take it away from you
Blizzard are faggots, but not understanding that you have no rights makes you a retard.

>create your own platform
Until the companies that control the money decide they're not going to allow you anymore because they're still butthurt about 2016. Soon banks will be denying you access to your account because you didn't agree with a tranny online.

Oh no i can't believe the main heroes won in the new capeshit movie i can't handle this shock my small pee pee and brain are hurt waaahwaaah help me mommy.

yes that is exactly how fags act. their identity is built around one thing.

>THINGS HAPPENED ONCE, THEY WILL FOREVER AFTER HAPPEN THAT WAY. FOR EVER AND ALWAYS, AMEN!
Faggot.

wrong tab, man

you just lost the debate and you know it, hence the anger.
that's what i'm talking about, telling people to make their own platforms is mental gymnastics; they'll never be left alone just because they start their own companies. it's a rhetorical trick nobody should be falling for because the world doesn't work that way.

good deal desu

wait isn't Yea Forums

>he feature is there: it's a cake for a gay couple.
Please point to the physical property for what makes the cake gay. That's so stupid it's fucking unfathomable.

>disinformation
>anything to the right of full communism is "disinformation"

>because the world doesn't work that way
>t.soviet

Well think about it, almost all of these mega corporations have gotten such status through bribery, lobbying and complete and utter government interference in the private sector. Now when people want to put a leash on them and undo the damage, lolbertarians act like we're heading towards a nany state

>my enemies list is ever expanding, I am a sane and stable person.
So lets see, facebook, youtube, google, all banks, all payment processors, all internet hosts, are there more I am missing?
You faggots will come up with any excuse to not have to contribute. If you think all those companies are liberal and discriminatory, you should create competition.
Oh wait, you are a bunch of lazy faggots who would rather sit and moan while riding the coat-tails of liberals.

>rent a videogame
>rent
>to rent
>torent
>torrent

Reminder that paying white (and especially working class) money to a progressive is an insult and hitler to him.

It's a leftist position to require businesses to serve equally and without discrimination, but the definitions of a gay cake here is not entirely fair. The supreme court would define the gay cake as explicitly deviating from the product that the baker would have provided anyways. The semantics of the gay cake are null. How do you determine a customer ordering a cake to be gay without either explicit requests to make a GAY cake from the customer, or with some sort of vetting program to make sure you discriminate and not serve gay people. If that gay couple never mentioned they were gay and hadn't requested a cake to represent their gayness, they would have been served regardless. I'm not saying business shouldn't be able to discriminate against anyone, but it's discrimination nonetheless. I suppose you would argue the baker is being impinged upon though

>Please point to the physical property for what makes the cake gay.
the gay couple ordering it. if you don't think it's wrong, then you don't believe in the freedom of association. by extension, you could be forced to do things or live around people you don't want to be around.

Already happened. Chase bank. Possible thanks to Chokepoint legislation passed by Obama administration.

the problem is you can't torrent multiplayer games.
Overwatch is garbage anyway, I don't understand why anyone in their right minds would waste their time on it.

>be me
>fap to traps
>buy a frog
>the frog is now gay
Check and mate, Infowars

>happened once
Happened four times, he is sued again. Tiktok faggots.

>I suppose you would argue the baker is being impinged upon though
because they are. their freedom of association was violated, all the rest is just noise. the specifics of the case do not matter - they didn't want to make the cake, court said they have to.
this sets the precedent that people don't have the right to choose who they associate with and doesn't end with gay wedding cakes, thats why people take issue with it.
give an inch, they'll take a mile.

> live around people you don't want to be around.
You can't even make a basic argument, are you trying to imply you get to choose your neighbors or some shit?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Attached: 1556651184767.jpg (988x1059, 148K)

Non of these businesses exist in a vacuum, and are all tied to government interests and regulation. You are just selectively citing free market principles to companies that are essentially indirect extensions of state interest.

For a group whose founder said everyone should love and respect each other, Christians sure are a bunch of assholes.

No, the court did NOT make them make the cake. They were ruled in FAVOR of.

are you forced to live around people at all? it's a yes or no question.

>hire this girl for 20 dollars
>hire a bf for 20 dollars
>pretend to be one to the other and get them to play together

true love

>I'll continue to pretend to be psychic, that will prove I am a stable adult.
You can hope for what ever you want, faggot, but pretending you are psychic makes you a delusional faggot.

>a baker was forced to make a cake for a black person, he was denied freedom of association!
Pretty sure this has been decided upon. Don't hold your breath, faggot.

that is indeed a violation of the freedom of association. america is not as free as people seem to think.

>then you don't believe in the freedom of association
So we're in agreement that the actual discrimination is against the people, not the cake. Cool. That's illegal for a business owner, as it should be.

Freedom of association in American law primarily relates to the freedom to assemble. Feel free to cite otherwise. There's nothing in there about the freedom to discriminate against others based on race, gender, religious beliefs, etc. I mean, you're free to go wherever you want of course if you want to leave a group that you don't like, but that doesn't actually give you the right to deny service to the people. You have a religious right not to make a product that endorses something you do not agree with, but that does not mean you have a right to deny service to a person whose very existence you disagree with.

It's a pretty fundamental part of Civil Rights in the US. I'm not sure how you missed it. In fact the first real mention of "freedom of association" comes from a case brought by the NAACP to the Supreme Court.

OW is the most Tumblr Onions game they have, no shit they banned this guy.

>having to buy a new house everytime lefshits decide to flood your neighborhood with shitskins
So easy, especially with Title VIII in place.

>So we're in agreement that the actual discrimination is against the people, not the cake.
that was never in dispute, and you discriminate when you choose ice cream flavor. it's not as powerful or mean a word as you seem to think it is.
>That's illegal for a business owner, as it should be
except it's not illegal and whether it should be is merely your opinion. this was an unconstitutional and illegal ruling, merely one of many.
>You have a religious right not to make a product that endorses something you do not agree with
they were christian, and being gay is against christianity, therefore against their faith. you've just conceded that they had the right, even by your own definition, to refuse service to the gay couple. it's not about disagreeing with someones existence, its about not wanting to provide them service.
you either have freedom of association period, or you don't have it at all. there's no middle ground. all this rabble about specifics is a waste of time.

you assume you have to live in an urban area. the people you despise all live in such areas. maybe you should give up your fancypants and lollipops and not be there if it bothers you so much.

If they loved their neighbor they wouldn't want him punished for talking about a movie or not making a cake.

In the same way shouting 'Fire!' in a theater in not protected speech, your racism and bigotry and not protected.

>In the same way shouting 'Fire!' in a theater in not protected speech
The quickest way to spot someone that never understood what free speech is.

racism is a marxist construct i dont subscribe to, sorry.
but yeah, both things you mentioned are protected under the law. you're thinking of freedom from consequences, which i haven't argued. shouting fire in a theater is not protected because it's unlawful, there's a big difference.

It is not a yes or no question, you either live with people that acknowledge property rights that are enforced by outsiders, or you live as a nomad and have no property rights, meaning any random other nomad could just follow your ass around and there would be nothing you could do about it.
You do not have the right to isolation, not in this country.

Believe it or not, you get ticketed by the police for doing that, you raging retard.
"Da gubment punish me for speech!"
There, I tried to put it in words you might understand.

That is not an example of anything that is related with free speech. You can yell fire in a theater, if there is a fire you better. You cannot intentionally cause a false panic. That has nothing to do with the constitutional protection to criticize the government. That is what free speech pertains to. It has nothing to do with some conversation you are having with some other asshole on the streets.

>the right has any sort of power to punish anyone
Retard

>It is not a yes or no question, you either live with people that acknowledge property rights that are enforced by outsiders, or you live as a nomad and have no property rights, meaning any random other nomad could just follow your ass around and there would be nothing you could do about it.
this is a huge aside i won't respond to because it has nothing to do with what i said
>You do not have the right to isolation
legally or morally? i dont think anyone was making a case for it either way so i dont care.

>except it's not illegal and whether it should be is merely your opinion. this was an unconstitutional and illegal ruling, merely one of many.
Except it's always been ruled as such in court by judges, because "freedom of association" only covers non-profit religious groups and clubs, not businesses which serve the public.

>they were christian, and being gay is against christianity, therefore against their faith. you've just conceded that they had the right, even by your own definition, to refuse service to the gay couple.
No, I conceded that they had the right not to make a cake that was in any way different from a regular cake they would make for a wedding, i.e. if it somehow advertised or promoted homosexuality. You should brush up on your reading skills.

Please find any legal citation of freedom of association that allows businesses that serve the public, or really any business for that matter, to discriminate against who they serve, as opposed to what they serve. I'll save you the trouble and tell you that in this case, freedom of religion (and the freedom of association) would only discriminate against people who join your organization (such as a church).

You should try learning what "freedom of association" actually means as well. You're misusing it quite often.

these people are philosophically bankrupt and will argue feelings over logic any day while calling it "common sense". it's like arguing with children, lmao

You unironically described immigration policy and how governments react to criticisms of it.

Imagine paying 425 dollars for this

Attached: snuggery.jpg (735x671, 105K)

>That is not an example of anything that is related with free speech.
>It's only commonly cited as an area, and explicitly not the only one, where free speech is not protected, which was used as a comparison where "freedom of association," which isn't an actual freedom in the constitution, also isn't protected.
So are you just misunderstanding the things that you read, or are you being stupid on purpose?

fancy name for a whore

>serious consequenses

Serious consequences is jail time or a fine. Being told you can't play a video game for a week (not even all video games, just one) is barely a consequence.

Grow up and have sex.

Attached: 1468857719142.jpg (236x276, 18K)

How much to eat her asshole? Asking for a friend.

>the government has the ability to determine which words are dangerous and which words are not.
So ticketing people for saying anti-gay things would be ok, as long as people are willing to say it causes some sort of panic. Ok man, you give the government that power.
Are not other people in this very thread expressing that fear? That, like shouting fire, shouting nigger, or faggot will get you ticketed?
You see that as something that is not a freedom of speech issue I guess.
Some words should be restricted under the penalty of a fine, I guess, you convinced me.

>Except it's always been ruled as such in court by judges, because "freedom of association" only covers non-profit religious groups and clubs, not businesses which serve the public.
a private business doesn't serve the public, it serves whoever owns it. you don't understand ownership and services. store owners have the right to refuse anyone service, including negros and gays. they don't actually have to specify why they refuse someone service, they merely reserve the right and out you go. you can't call the police and say anything that would make them force the business owner to provide you service. thats the whole point, the court ruling is retarded and illegal and the people that argue it's justified don't believe in private ownership.
> I conceded that they had the right not to make a cake that was in any way different from a regular cake they would make for a wedding, i.e. if it somehow advertised or promoted homosexuality
it is different, because it's for a gay couple. it is different, because it both advertises and promotes homosexuality. you don't understand basic logic and you're arguing based on rules that only make sense in a feelings over logic perspective, therefore your argument is nonsense and you lose the debate in each post. you have to actually adhere to real world logic if you want to win an argument in the real world.
>Please find any legal citation of freedom of association that allows businesses that serve the public, or really any business for that matter, to discriminate against who they serve, as opposed to what they serve
it's called private ownership, maybe you should look it up. you're not obligated to even specify why you deny someone service.
>freedom of religion (and the freedom of association) would only discriminate against people who join your organization (such as a church).
says who, you? try learning what private ownership and basic philosophy is.

It's not a judgement of the words. The words have to be a call to action. That is not free speech, no matter how many times retards cite the fire example as free speech. When you yell fire in a theater you are not simply saying the word, you are calling people to action.

>a private business doesn't serve the public,
But this is wrong, retard. There are no rights to protect anything you just mentioned, that's why you can't actually cite any cases or laws that would prove your point. It would be extremely easy to do so. You're making shit up because you think freedom of association is a thing like freedom of religion or freedom of speech. It literally is not. It's "freedom to assemble," because the words explicitly mean the right for a group to gather. That's it.

> you don't understand basic logic and you're arguing based on rules that only make sense in a feelings
This is exactly what you're doing, though. You're arguing that the feelings of those business owners is more important than the legal facts and precedents set forth to end the unlawful discrimination of individuals based on gender, sex, age, orientation, religion, physical disability, and so on.

>you have to actually adhere to real world logic if you want to win an argument in the real world.
Which, again, is why you can't actually cite any real world cases or laws that support your claims in any way, shape, or form.

Hilariously, your only defense is "the courts are wrong!" Yes, I'm sure all of those people have been wrong this entire time, because it only makes sense to assume "freedom of assembly" is carte blanche to discriminate against anyone for any reason. What a brainlet. Christ alive.

Ah, so James Woods' hang 'em all tweet was a call for action, thus not protected speech, I at least understand your logic, thanks.