The 1st ammendment should be extended to apply to corporations.
I highly doubt the founding fathers would have ever imagined that corporations would have more control over the freedom of speech than the government.
>be "mean" in a video game?
Money stolen
>say word?
Money stolen
>teabag in a video game?
Money stolen
realsport101.com
The ONLY people who benefit from censorship are multibillion dollar pigs and mentally ill power hungry trannies with a fragile ego.
Other urls found in this thread:
arstechnica.com
dotesports.com
realsport101.com
twitter.com
>sign this doc that says you wont do these things
>do those things
>why are you taking my money?
quit being a dumb cunt.
>>sign this doc that says you wont do these things
>>do those things
>>why are you taking my money?
>quit being a dumb cunt.
Whats wrong noggy? Transition surgery not going the way you hoped it would?
>Anonymous
> 07/25/22(Mon)23:33:28 No.6069929511658778320413217m.jpg (99 KB, 1024x576)File: 1658778320413217m.jpg (99 KB, 1024x576) google yandex iqdb wait99 KB JPG Anonymous 07/25/22(Mon)23:33:28 No.606992951The 1st ammendment should be extended to apply to corporations.
>
>I highly doubt the founding fathers would have ever imagined that corporations would have more control over the freedom of speech than the government.
>
>>be "mean" in a video game?
>Money stolen
>
>>say word?
>Money stolen
>
>>teabag in a video game?
>Money stolen
>
>arstechnica.com
>
>dotesports.com
>
>realsport101.com
>
>The ONLY people who benefit from censorship are multibillion dollar pigs and mentally ill power hungry trannies with a fragile ego.
how long until someone sues for banning from private servers?
don't call people faggots on minecraft you fucking nignog
>don't call people names!
boycott
This is exactly what happens when people say the constitution doesn't apply to corporations. Imagine how quickly the people making that argument would walk it back if there was news of a big office corporation that was mass firing Christians unless they disvowed their religion and had to say they were an atheist. Freedom of speech in corporate law would be codified pretty quickly.
the first amendment does apply to corporations: they have a right to free speech.
what you mean to say is that the first amendment should be /incorporated against/ private corporations.
This, fuck these faggot trannies.
>mass firing Christians unless they disvowed their religion
Based, Christianity is Jewish slave religion.
Agreed except
>corporations would have more control over the freedom of speech than the government
Wrong. Despite what commies want you to think, the gov't is perfectly capable of overriding the freedom of speech attacks made by corporations (see: Citizens United, safe harbor provisions). The open secret is that corporations are actually operating as unofficial agents of the state as they are in a symbiotic relationship with said government. The government outsourcing oppression to private enterprise is what the founding fathers did not account for.
anti-discrimination laws already exist you stupid nigger
>against
The 1st ammendment wouldn't hurt corporations if they weren't so hell bent on authoritarianism
Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happines. Any who should obstruct them should be killed.
>What is CRT training
>n-no wait that's not what i meant
ok fag
>oh no the big tranny boogeyman
you have to be older than 18 to post here
it's just a video game user. go play a different one.
>anti discrimination laws in place
>workplace discriminates against you cuz "muh white demons"
>t-thats not discrimination!
You said that it's legal for a corporation can fire people because they're christian. This isn't true. You can sue if you get fired because of your religion. But you've probably never had a job before because you're an underage basedjak poster.
Oh i was 18 alright... 18 inches in your mom's fat ass.
Not even the same guy lol
My point was that corporations just break the laws anyway
Cool, but isn't it a school night? You shouldn't be up this late.
It already applies to them since they're public traded companies, they just have the money and people in power to get around that amendment.
>It already applies to them since they're public traded companies
Are you fucking retarded?
>law says you can't do x
>say i can do this
>somehow it's justified
nice argument retard
If I can buy shares in your company, then you're publicly traded.
Ill go to bed when you're mother stops being a whore... which i guess makes me an insomniac.
Ok but what does that have to do with the first amendment?
>Say "goodnight"
>Banned because "night" has the word "nig" in it
>Money stolen
Microsoft shills will defend this
I'm pretty sure that a video game company enforcing restrictions on in-game chat does not violate your right to free speech as protected under the 1st Amendment. Sorry user
If you're public, then you have to abide by the Constitution in order to remain operating. If you're private, you don't have to abide by anything but the law.
>606994792
>I'm pretty sure that a video game company enforcing restrictions on sperch doest violate freedom of speech
What the fuck? How old are you? Holy shit there is no way an actual adult is this stupid.
Why are people complaining about this on a website that nobody important will read? Whats the point?
>see a loophole being exploited
>is it the corporations that are the problem?
>no its the people being exploited of course!
I bet you special ed teacher is real proud you managed to get on the internet ALL BY YOURSELF.
>just stop talking about it user
>This is exactly the situation in which Amro Elansari found himself [1]
>After he was “muted,” he filed suit against the company that operated the video game, claiming that he was deprived of due process, free speech and human rights.[2]
>However, this was a relatively easy issue for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to resolve.
>It held that “[t]he First Amendment and its constitutional free speech guarantees restrict government actors, not private entities,” and that “[d]efendants, who are not alleged to be state actors, are not subject to constitutional free speech guarantees.”[3]
There is no loophole. You're a teenager that doesn't know how the world works. You don't know what "publicly owned" means. Stop fucking posting, you underage retard.
>sorry goyim
>corporations are above the law
Unsurprisingly jewish.