view the rest of the comments
Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
I mean Planned Parenthood is explicitly NOT a charity. It's an ineffective Political Action Committee that spent decades bilking donations and wasn't even able to codify roe v wade. They don't deserve shit. Hospitals in the US are also explicitly not Charities. They may be non-profits, maybe, but they don't run on donations, they expect payments from patients for services rendered. There is no world where those examples of the failures of a Capitalist society should be considered a charity.
There's a PAC of the name but Planned Parenthood proper is a 501(c)(3).
Except they're literally a charity.
Yeah, and Michael Jordan isn't a former basketball player, he's an actor! And don't try to tell me that's a different person, because nothing can ever be named the same as another thing!
So if Unity said Michael Jordan is not a valid basket ball player, would you be up in arms about it?
No, because it wouldn't affect anything. Withholding money from a valid charity does.
What if their definition of a "valid charity" doesn't agree with yours?
The federal government decides what a valid charity is, not them.
Why? Is there some law they are breaking by having their own opinion of what a valid charity is?