If they allow fundraisers for cops, they have to allow fundraisers for skinheads, serial rapists, and an endless list of truly loathsome criminals who might find a sympathetic audience online. If those campaigns aren't central to your business model, and they're not, why put up with the risk and bad publicity?
Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields
But there's a big part of me that thinks how reflexively potentially shortsighted it is. Granted, you could have some truly loathsome people getting defense money, absolutely. But this policy also shuts out legitimate people from getting defense money as well.
Sure, there could be other methods of raising money, but the whole point of this is to make it easy and serve good causes. Maybe it's just me, but I consider allowing the justice system to work as intended to be a good cause. It's similar to 4th and 5th Amendment protections... sure, guilty people abuse the intent, but they're really there for the innocent.
April Fool's Day is the one day of the year
that people critically evaluate news articles before accepting them as true.
What if they weren't consistent? Wouldn't they have the right to be so under your understanding of rights and ideological discrimination? Or is the only discrimination that is acceptable the kind that attacks homosexuals?
I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK