A case of Orwellian Double-Speak:

The site http://www.beliefnet.com/ is a part of the Fox Entertainment Group.

The first statement under their “Rule of Conduct” states:

“Welcome to Beliefnet! Beliefnet is committed to protecting a high level of freedom of expression, and to maintaining a welcoming and safe community in which that expression can flourish.”

http://www.beliefnet.com/About-Us/Rules-of-Conduct.aspx

They further state in their “Rules of Conduct”, “We will not censor members for expressing an opinion, within the limits of these Rules of Conduct.”

I posted the text of my blog, http://mixermuse.com/blog/2010/01/29/the-greater-good-and-scott-roeder/, on their abortion debate forum at http://community.beliefnet.com/go/forum/view/43971/68559/Abortion_Debate. The moderator, justme333, deleted my post stating, “Anti-abortion is not an acceptable term – the only terms that are acceptable are Pro-life and Pro-choice.” This rule was not on the overall “Rules of Conduct” but on the local “guidlines” post for the thread. After consulting the local boards “guidelines” I found this:

“With regards to this board’s guidelines, yes, they are the same as the old board.
The same guidelines apply for the new boards.
That terms describing the two sides of the abortion debate are limited to
Pro-Life and Pro-Choice.

After that, the same general Bnet Rules of Conduct apply just as on any
other Forum board.

But do realize that not all boards have individual board guidelines, only
certain boards which are not set-up to be a debate environment so are thus
considered a “protected” board where the local guideline would indicate such.
Or certain boards that are hot-topic debates like this one for instance.
Different boards may have different guidelines so on each new board, one
can find a sticky thread which should show in the title, “Local Guidelines.””

The main boards “Rule of Conduct” says nothing about “certain boards which are not set-up to be a debate environment so are thus
considered a “protected” board”

The thought police on this thread insist that everyone on the thread call folks against abortion “pro-life”. They further insist that folks do not use the term anti-abortion or anti-choice. Can we say – Christian censorship? I think we can add certain forms of Christianity under the totalitarian regimes that Orwell criticized in “Nineteen Eighty-Four”. Folks, this is a case and point why the dark ages are thankfully behind us. However, it still exists behind the curtains in certain fundamentalist, Christian groups. It usually just takes a little logic and facts to get them to show their true face. My preference would be to call the “anti-choice” movement “pro-death” because that is what I really think it is but in the interest of keeping the debate alive I call them “anti-choice”. I know they would love to get the double-speak points by having us call them “pro-life” but for reasons I have stated elsewhere on this thread, I think that would be like calling a circle a square and I would not want to propagate that highly deceptive mind think. These folks insist on imposing their god on the rest of us and are willing to go to any extremes to do it – remind you of other zealots? I love it when they get radical and lie, censor, act badly because it cuts through their “spiritual” façade. I have also officially registered a complaint with the main board but since we are talking about the Fox Entertainment Group I do not expect any action (prove me wrong beliefnet).

The moderator also stated that I could not have the links to my blog (in the original article) which I understand and would have edited out. justme333 stated he/she tried to edit out the links but when he/she saw the banned word speak violations (my embellishment) deleted the post.

If you would like to protest the thought police censorship at beliefnet you can send an email to:

community@staff.beliefnet.com

If I hear back I will update this post.