Andrée Seu Peterson on the "Time" cover 
Click to Print
Include Comments
Google gives pro-lifers a chance
Yesterday, Google reversed its previous position on banning ads that mixed “abortion and religion-related content.” The Christian Institute, a pro-life British organization, had filed a suit against the internet giant for rejecting its ad, which read: “UK abortion law: Key views and news on abortion law from the Christian Institute.” The institute argued that Google had violated Britain’s Equality Act of 2006, which prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion in the provision of a good or service.
Now abortion-related ads from religious associations that are presented in a “factual and campaigning way” can be displayed on Google searches the world-over. The two resolved the issue out of court.
A Google spokesman said:
“The issue of abortion is an emotive subject and Google does not take a particular side. Over the last few months we have received a number of representations about our abortion ads policy and we decided to conduct a review to make sure it was fair, up to date and consistent with local customs and practices.
“Following the review we have decided to amend our policy, creating a level playing field and enable religious associations to place ads on abortion in a factual way.”
back to top39 Comments to “Google gives pro-lifers a chance”
If “Google does not take a particular side,” why amend their policy to create “a level playing field”?
Report comment to moderator
Liberals = “free speech for me but not for thee”.
Report comment to moderator
It’s hardly a surprise that Google would’ve ban anti-abortion ads. The founders are two Russian-American Jews, and Jews are the most pro-abortion group in America.
Report comment to moderator
Good to hear.
This is the 2nd news story in as many days about the defeat of a leftist attempt to censor conservative voices. Google’s political bias is no secret. It seems that, as time moves forward, more and more people, laboring under the delusion that “liberalism” actually means freedom, are willing to sacrifice democratic principles for Orwellian notions of “fairness.” Voting for “liberalism” against freedom makes people feel morally righteous and large-hearted; this is its only justification. The silver lining here is that normal people find this kind of bias disgusting and react against it. The more the left practices it, the more clearly we see that freedom is the farthest thing from their minds.
Report comment to moderator
This is progress. Now there will be ads for pro-life and we’ll progress towards real choice and real informed consent. This is a good start, what we’ve all been waiting for. (And what DavidL said.)
Report comment to moderator
I can’t get over the naivete/wishful thinking/gullibility of Christians who think that if women just knew that a fetus is alive, they would stop having abortions.
Report comment to moderator
Jews are not pro-abortion per se.
They just take the opposite side of Christians. Christians are seen as conservatives so Jews become liberal.
Christians are seen as religious so Jews want to be seen as secular.
Who do you think is behind the never ending assault on the celebration of Christmas?
Report comment to moderator
I hope no one owned Google from the top. It was $750 less than a year ago and is at $422 today. That’s a 43.7% haircut. Discrimination suits and other things like this won’t help but the worst part is yet to come. Competition will soon be eating from Google’s food bowl too – something that they have no had to fend off before. i sure hope this company isn’t being run or owned by a bunch of young Obama loving lefties who are full of themselves like Yahoo was
Llama made a bundle with puts on Google after he told you it was all down hill for them from now on – and it still is.
Report comment to moderator
Yeah, that would be a real head-scratcher, Night Train, if it were even remotely true. Where do you come up with your gibberish?
We’ve seen the Guttmacher Institutes reason’s why women have abortions. “Because the fetus isn’t really alive” isn’t one of them. Claiming that the fetus isn’t a real baby is an irrational, counterintuitive evasion tactic that is used to justify abortions after or before the fact, but it’s not the reason women seek them.
Saying “a fetus is alive” is a contradiction in terms. Arguing so is about as useful as arguing that a tree is alive. What you meant, surely, to say is that we want to convince people that the fetus fits the definition of personhood. But arguing otherwise is an equally evasive tactic that people use to assuage their guilty consciences. On the whole, people treat their dogs better than they treat unborn children. Sickening.
Report comment to moderator
Thanks, Dave.
Did you go to the same Bible College as Outkast?
Report comment to moderator
If you were right, NT, then why are women changing their minds after they see the sonograms — something Planned Parenthood and NARAL fought hard?
Report comment to moderator
NJL, how many abortions were there last year?
The year before that?
The year before that?
The year before that?
Exactly.
Report comment to moderator
And there would have been more……
Report comment to moderator
DAVID L. It’s time for a leftist attempt not to censor conservative voices but to . . . waterboard them!
Because we don’t have enough troops in Afghanistan, we are relying too much on air power, which is causing excess civilian deaths. Sec. Gates had to apologize “personally” for our slaughter of 90 Afghans in airstrikes. Calling all “pro-lifers.”
Report comment to moderator
When a liberal manages to post a serious comment about the issue, I’ll be happy to address it.
Report comment to moderator
#15 David,
I hope ypou are planning fpor a very, very long life indeed but i still donlt think you have to respond.
Report comment to moderator
Night Train,
You are an absolutely despicable person, a repugnant little toad. Your mind is filled with all kinds of digusting filth that taints everyone around you.
Based on your latest juvenile, insulting and irrelevant post, I’m writing to the editors of this blog to have you permanently dismissed.
Report comment to moderator
I can’t see how anti-abortion ads will be pleasing to other advertisers or good for Google. Poison in the well.
Report comment to moderator
David, I’m just askin’, that’s all.
Report comment to moderator
Night Train — you are hogging all the opprobrium. Can’t you leave some for an insect?
David L– You have delivered the mother of all personal attacks par excellence — a model for future generations. You are not to be improved upon! Secondly, if you send that email, you will be violating another rule against complaining about attacks against others.
Congratulations, fella!
Report comment to moderator
David, I owed Llama one for him saying that I’m filled with an insane hatred of non-whites that will one day probably cause me to kill someone because of their race.
I don’t remember you complaining about that.
And if he didn’t get banned for that, and I get banned for this, it’ll just show what a double standard there is around here.
Report comment to moderator
DAVID L.: . . . the fetus fits the definition of personhood. But arguing otherwise is an equally evasive tactic that people use to assuage their guilty consciences.
Wait a minute. Accusing anti-criminalization people of having guilty consciences is blaming others for the weakness of your own position! A fetus either is or is not a person. Advocates of one side or the other can’t create or destroy the evidence, the terms of analysis, or change the diversity of opinions of people past and present.
But go ahead and try. Lock me up. Pillory me for a bad person. Get under the skin of every pro-abort in America with pictures of dismembered fetuses. Will that lift the scales from their eyes and awaken their consciences with the conviction that abortion is murder? David, even the Hebrews at the foot of Mt. Sinai didn’t think abortion was murder.
Report comment to moderator
Well, Scroopy, if the Afghans really cared about their own people, they wouldn’t harbor Mr. bin Laden and company. Civilians die in war, and often they die because their own government didn’t have the guts to stand up to the bad guys in first place.
Report comment to moderator
Ribbit
Report comment to moderator
You’ve got guts, NJLAWYER, but no heart, or at least not as much heart as Bill Gates. I’m going to make you own that post, kid.
Report comment to moderator
NIGHT TRAIN: Vulgar comments will not be tolerated on this blog. This is your last warning.
SCROOP MOTH: Reporting vulgar comments to the editors is not against the rules and is appreciated since it’s difficult for us to monitor every comment on every thread 24/7.
DAVID L.: While I realize you were upset with NIGHT TRAIN’s comment, please don’t compound the problem by getting into name calling.
Report comment to moderator
NT: I owed Llama one for him saying that I’m filled with an insane hatred of non-whites that will one day probably cause me to kill someone because of their race.
LLAMA advocates killing Mexican pedestrians with land mines to prevent their illegal entry into El Norte.
Report comment to moderator
David, sorry if I offended you. It was vulgar, and I shouldn’t have posted it. But it was kinda funny.
Report comment to moderator
Night Train,
Thanks for apologizing. It’s big of you. Likewise, I shouldn’t have called you names, so I’m sorry about that.
I’d have thought it was funny about 10 years ago and in a different context. Now I’m just concerned about scrubbing those images out of my mind.
Report comment to moderator
Murderous comments are dandy. How vulgar is it to say, “You are an absolutely despicable person, a repugnant little toad. Your mind is filled with all kinds of digusting filth that taints everyone around you.” You can’t report personal attacks against others unless they happen to be vulgar, in which case, please do, because vulgarity is everyone’s concern. Nobody tries harder than Moth to obey the rules, but they still don’t make sense.
Report comment to moderator
#15 david L,
Welcome to our world with the Night stalker…..eeerrrrr….. I mean Train.
Report comment to moderator
#23 NJlaywer.
‘Civilians die in war, and often they die because their own government didn’t have the guts to stand up to the bad guys in first place.’
That is exactly why 2,800 AMericans died on 911. Clinto\n refused to take the battle to our enemies after we wre attacked voer and oaver again ion his watch. These deaths are on his account.
Report comment to moderator
#21 Night Train,
Yea blame a llama for your insanity. Please remmeber to come to me for your cure too
Report comment to moderator
#27 Scroopy,
I told you that you wouldn’t know squat about anything if I took off the smilely faces. Thanks for once again proving me totally and completely correct in this regard.
Land mines wouldn’t work. Lefties put millions of land mines in the DMZ of Vietnam and Korea and it didn’t stop anyone. Why would this insane lefty idea work now? What we need are way stations to give them water, $100 cash and a map to St Louis instead – right?
This is too easy.
Report comment to moderator
Which comment by Night Train was the one that got everybody so excited, and why? I’m clueless. Usually clueless describes me in a general way, but I’m missing a specific clue here.
Message # what? Or did it get deleted and I missed it?
Report comment to moderator
I’m with you Llama on 32.
So I guess I own it, Scroopy.
And who you callin’ “kid”???
(That’s a fightin’ word where I come from — my sister used to call me that when she was pushing me around.)
Report comment to moderator
NJL
your statements once again have illustrated to me why the pro-life movement in the US is entirely hypocritical. The death of 90 civilians in Afghanistan has nothing to do with Osama — he’s in Pakistan. The Taliban were nowhere near the village in question; the US bombed it on faulty intelligence — a rival tribesmen with a grudge said there were Taliban and hence they bombed it. The US is now holding him in protective custody while the Afghan civil authorities charged him for murder. Initially the US denied the incident and later claimed they had killed Taliban only and then changed it to some civilians and Taliban and finally when photographs from an independent journalist revealed different they said they would launch an investigation. Justifying the deaths of children as the consequence of the Taliban and Osama does not strike me as a pro-life position.
Report comment to moderator
Message # what? Or did it get deleted and I missed it?
It got deleted. Although funny, it was pretty nasty, and didn’t belong on here. I shouldn’t have posted it.
Report comment to moderator
LLAMA: you wouldn’t know squat about anything if I took off the smilely faces.
Perhaps so, but your notorious proposal for land mines came without smilies.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!