lmao, spot on. liberals like to have those kind of wet dreams.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
-
-
It depends on what the help is, and whether there were ideological principles behind it. For example, I'd say yes to helping, let's say Korean immigrant women who have been raped. But a big NO to 'pray the gay away' and 'rebirthing' stuff. Does that make sense?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
My favorite (*for the "lol the balls on these guys"-quality) example of this:https://www.dw.com/en/charity-slammed-for-serving-discriminatory-soup/a-1907672 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nearly every charity targets specific subgroups to the exclusion of others, correct? e.g. charity orgs that individually help veterans, alzheimer's, breast cancer, homelessness, etc. each target those subgroups.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It is acceptable, but less than ideal, particularly depending on what lines it distinguishes. "Okay" is too vague.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There's no way this many people actually mean "yes for any group"
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The term group is interesting... some see it as meaning typical discrimination, I see it as having a specific cause or illness. I've cerebral palsy, there are charities for it, and probably anything else. Curious how it seems some assume the worst.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I should be able to set up a trust for the benefit of, say, members of my family, but I shouldn't get to claim charitable status for it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.