Good As You

I love it when those fighting for equal opportunity are so articulate and appear so much smarter than the opposition. Seriously, it all comes down to freedom and love and they cannot argue with that. Thank you Jeremy.

It looks like they haven't gotten any comments for any of the posts they have put up.

I found their policy on comments interesting. (insert a Jeremy eye roll here) I quote:

"Comments are not guaranteed to be posted. They are moderated and will only appear if approved and selected for publication. We are eager to facilitate conversation by publishing comments, but submissions that are offensive, vulgar, overly personal, cynical, disrespectful, irrelevant, redundant or unnecessarily contentious will not be considered. Messages may occasionally be edited for content, length and privacy. Comments on this blog may not refer specifically to any current electoral candidate, or any measure on a current ballot – at any level of local, state, or federal government."

I supose this constitutes their understanding of freedom of speech. I have been trying to figure out if there is an intelgence and logic exemption in there some where. I also love that they reserve the right to "...edit for content, length and privacy..." I suspect that they are very good at that.

Your comments, Jeremy, while well spoken, logical and inteligent would probably be considered by the to be at least: offensive because you disagree with them; overly personal because you tell them that you are married; disrespectful because you use the "civil" argument as being seperate from their faith based reasons.

I would bet they will not post your comments.

That "Crazy Boise" title sounds like the opposite of what it is. Are you sure these aren't moles for our side doing deep undercover work? Hilarious

I'm not sure we can really hope for much for our comments to get through. According to their comment policy:

Comments are not guaranteed to be posted. They are moderated and will only appear if approved and selected for publication. We are eager to facilitate conversation by publishing comments, but submissions that are offensive, vulgar, overly personal, cynical, disrespectful, irrelevant, redundant or unnecessarily contentious will not be considered. Messages may occasionally be edited for content, length and privacy.

Comments on this blog may not refer specifically to any current electoral candidate, or any measure on a current ballot – at any level of local, state, or federal government.

Pretty stringent terms to screen the comments they don't agree with, if you ask me.

"offensive, vulgar, overly personal, cynical, disrespectful, irrelevant, redundant or unnecessarily contentious"

Well my comment doesn't fall into any of these categories, and I wouldn't expect any of yours to qualify either. So there is no credible reason why they should shut us out, even per their own terms.

But this is why it's so important that you take a screen shot of your comment. Get it to me, and I'll post it on here. If they end up not showing our words, then I will make sure people see what they are shutting out.

They don't seem to have approved any comments on any of their posts, so I doubt we're going to get anywhere on this one.

Well Sean, since we've only been posting during non-work hours, I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt. G-A-Y's comments don't go through overnight either.

We have to remember to be careful about tossing out accusations that they're curbing speech... It's their website, and they do have that right, just as much as Donald Trump has the right to fire his employee, say... Miss California ;)

As long as the government isn't deciding who can speak, FRC can do whatever they want. It's a very poor editorial choice when you give a voice only to your side. But who ever accused FRC of making good decisions?

Jeremy, your screenshots are a great reminder of how dishonest these people are (your comments *clearly* do not violate their Terms of Use), and they're also very entertaining in a Liberty Live kind of way. Geez, I miss your highlight clips. Ever think of making a best-of Liberty Live compliation post?

DN: Well of course nobody is denying FOF their legal right to deny comments. We are just going to use it to highlight how insistent these folks are on shutting out dissenting views. The screenshots (I already have a few) will help to do that.

I must admit that I do miss Liberty Live. I'd love to know what went down behind the scenes to make AFA to abruptly pull it.

As of Tuesday morning @ 11:55 am (in PA) there are now two comments that are time stamped July 20, in the evening. The one from Jonathan actually makes sense. The other one sounds like a cheer for FOF.

My comment must have given them something to think about....there are approved comments above and below my own. sigh.....

Update: Some (but not all) of your comments have been posted. However, none of my own have been published. The one that I printed above has been completely deleted. Two others are now in moderation limbo.

Also, it's interesting to note that they've posted a comment from one of their supportes who calls David Boies a "lunatic," yet have shut out my perfectly fair words that fully push back on the message rather than the individual.

woot! I'm approved!

I'm still "awaiting moderation." It would be a funny metaphor were I prone to excess.

Some get through, some get strewn...

Clearly, however, the moderator isn't receiving very many comments from readers of his own ilk. That's ha-ha-ha funny to me.

Amusingly, most of the approved comments are in favor of marriage equality.

Well mine are no longer even in moderation: They have apparently been deleted.

"offensive, vulgar, overly personal, cynical, disrespectful, irrelevant, redundant or unnecessarily contentious"

I have yet to read one of their own blog posts that would withstand the very scrutiny that they are supposedly applying to comments.

To their credit, of the 7 or 8 that they have "approved", only one of them supports her lies.

Goodness gracious, mine wasn't approved.

Hmmmm. Imagine that.

And I did give a measured, non-confrontational comment simply discussing how a society is best benefitted by encouraging same-sex couples rather than single same-sex attracted singles. It reduces the burden on the state.

And my comment has been censored (deleted) as well. At the same time that they approved another comment which lavishly praised their willingness to publish dissenting comments.

Everyone: Check out the twitter page of FOF's Gary Schneeberger for an "explanation" of why some of us have been shutout. Of course he's working the "terms" lines, even though we have clearly demonstrated not to be in violation. And he is seriously comparing this decision to the NY Times not printing an editor's letter:

http://twitter.com/gschneeberger