There's nothing stopping a storefront from simply delisting a game with LGBT content and citing "adult themes" or "sensitive topics" as the reason, since it's technically not discriminating against a real person.

Sexual references or themes in teen media has not really been controversial outside of hardcore conservative circles in decades, even in the 90s it was mainstream.

If this was really about the content itself, Google would simply have refused to approve the game when it arrived on their storefront last year. But they did approve it, and sold it on their storefront for months. The game's content did not change in that time.

Your original claim was LBGT could be "refused" service because of this.

Wrong.  

If you want to rework your position, fair.  But claiming refusal to serve based in race is the same as not selling a videogame...  no.  Just no.

You misunderstood my post; my claim was that refusing to serve people based on race or gender, as was once the norm in Western society, is the sort of unethical practises you get if you let companies "do business the way they want" without oversight. Letting companies just do as they please because "it's legal" or "they're a private business, they can do whatever they want" is a terrible idea as they inevitably screw over everyone. 

Have you watched almost any teen drama made in the last 30 years? Sex hasn't been taboo in a very long time.

Come on.  You are being disingenuous.  A post was made that banning this game was the same as the cake situation (refusing service), you agreed... and took it to the next level by talking service as it relates to gender and race.

Gender and race are constitutionally protection.  Videogames aren't. 

That simple.  But whatever, this thread has gotten so absurd, it isnt worth the time.

Good for Google.  

I was simply adding to their post, giving further examples of the kind of other things that happen when companies can do whatever they please.

I think we do agree though that this has kinda gone off the rails. Happy to agree to disagree and move on if you are, no hard feelings.

Nope.  LGBT have constitutional rights that protect against discrimination.

Videogames dont have constitutional rights.

So no.  Nothing in your post is accurate.

For the last time the game takes place in highschool, which means kids here in the states.  Sexual themes, implied sex, self harm via a group of kids (which is what highschoolers are) is controversial.  Google got rid of it for brand protection.

This couldn't be a more non story.

This.

If private companies can conduct business however they please, then they can say refuse to serve people based on their gender/race/sexuality, or ban games if they contain LGBT+ content or criticise a government or political party, or any number of things.