Maybe they can take their controversial views and videos elsewhere or abide by the rules in place. Even if they're right the platform they're using is sensitive to the advertisers so even if they drive the viewers, if there's no ad, it's bad business for the owner of the platform - Google. Tough world indeed but a couple of these youtubers could easily start their own platform and distribute their view on the news to the giant followings they already have. Why pewds is still on youtube is beyond me and says all I need to know about his content and average viewer. Seek investors while saving up and advertise appropriately as you do the jump to your own site. Keep the channel on youtube PC if they care about the ad-revenue and think they can funnel viewers to their new site through it.
If you knew the candle was fire then the meal was cooked a long time ago.
No, it is a procedure she wants, not one she needs. If a doctor doesn't want to do it, go to a doctor who does. People should have free access to abortion clinics, and doctors should be free to not be abortion doctors.
- - - Updated - - -
That, or she should get an abortion.
Yep, all the liberals, that's why these people have been threatened.........
Ragtagg
Secular Talk
Wrestling with Wregret and other wrestling youtubers
Boogie
L0nehawk
and so many others, get a grip and stop bringing your political blame game into this, hell Conservatives are all "Free speech free speech!" until someone says negatively about them then it's all "Censor the media, stop talking bad about me".
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people - Martin Luther King, Jr.
I think the problem is more that we'll have to trust Big Brother Google to not censor stuff they disagree with. I dislike Google but I don't really see how this is 'full thought police'. I get that people don't trust Google but I don't see this as going full thought police.
- - - Updated - - -
And what if none are available?
And why would you go to a doctor who doesn't want, or know how to perform one, and force him to do it? I support far less restrictions on abortion clinics, so they can exist freely.. Therefore, a woman will have access to abortion services, without forcing someone to give her one.
Not wanting to be pregnant is a need. There is no place for religious nonsense in medicine. Too important. What's next? Doctors refusing vaccines? Jehova's witness doctors refusing blood transfusion?
Revoke their license if they can't be professional.
- - - Updated - - -
Nobody is being forced. Don't want to do it? Stop being a doctor. Become a chiropractor.
I'm not sure where you got that I said all of that. What you talked about is the problem with 'choice' though. Obviously being qualified is important, but there are states in the US where there /might/ still be one abortion clinic open and I'm sure that place gets harassed daily. A Doctor's office (if it receives public funding at all) shouldn't be a place where religion is involved.
This kind of thought is along the same vein as the issue with trusting Google. What's offensive to them? They're (of course) super vague in their restrictions and everything will happen behind closed doors. I'm not really sure how youtube is going to do away with ads on basically anything when every cable TV channel has adds running.
Last edited by therayeffect; 2017-08-08 at 12:37 AM.
You literally just used "want" to try and describe a necessity. It's not a necessity, it's a want. This is not about religion, and I think abortion should be legal.
It is about force, because you want to force them to do it, or else... If it weren't about force, you would say, "If they don't want to perform abortions, then they don't have to. Period.
Also, not all doctors know how to give abortions.
- - - Updated - - -
That's why I noted I want to also get rid of the restrictions that limit abortion clinics, so there would be more around.
For me, this isn't about religion, it's about freedom. And yes, that means freedom for everyone.
Google already does this.
Youtube has already been doing this or at least a form of it, in that your searches are driven to specific content that is more profitable and may be totally off base from what you actually may want to view.
There are other hosting sites out there, and if you want to view that type of material you can. Furthermore, as much as I hate seeing liberals get there way... there is nothing stopping anyone from creating a website that hosts videos of a conservative nature, or has an obvious conservative slant/bias.
What continues to upset me in the current climate is that no one is 100% satisfied with this 2 party system, yet you all do everything in your power to polarize viewpoints and make sure they land in one camp or the other. As if a person couldn't be both a humanitarian AND be fiscally responsible.
Lets be real in 2017 we claim to be accepting of everyone regardless of gender, sexual preference, race, etc (all things we can physically see), but when it comes to our ideals, our thoughts, our beliefs, this couldn't be a more prejudice, intolerant, and segregational age.
This is almost a comical false equivalency. You have no idea what net neutrality is, what title II is, and what an ISP like Comcast or Verizon actually does. Comcast and Verizon regulating internet access is like some random person buying a single highway onramp and putting a tollbooth there and deciding who has access to the entire highway.
Beta Club Brosquad