UPDATE Thursday, December 03, 2009: I had told Google Blog Search that if they stopped censoring me, I'd say so on this Blog. As of this "UPDATE," Google Blog Search is now showing 1,967 posts as indexed and linked. () That's up again from only 4 at one point. Therefore, I'm adding this update.
1,967 is not all of the posts, but it seems that perhaps they are slowly re-indexing the site. I give them the benefit of the doubt. I haven't looked to see if they are avoiding "controversial" posts.
Mike Morrell, along with his partner, runs http://zoecarnate.com It's a huge list of links to sites with various ideas about Christianity. Way back when, I submitted this site and after a long while, Mike agreed to list it. He's been swamped though and is working on a site revamp. He sent me an email apologizing, which was good of him. Here's my reply:
Mike, I watch your Facebook and FriendFeed and see that you are working hard to network with many, many people. You are busy. I completely understand.
I've gotten a laugh out of your comments about having thousands of emails to go through. My To-Do List is seemingly endless. I smile about it and keep pecking away while adding things and handling many things right when they pop up rather than writing them down.
Mike, I've been blacklisted by Google Blog Search. (Censor this too,.) My traffic is way down, and commentary has fallen like a rock. Getting a link back from your site will help compensate for the censorship.
I don't want to take up too much of your time, but let me say that the new/old anti-hate speech movement is designed to get us all not to talk about sin while looking the other way when our country uses Hellfire Missiles from predator drones against mere babies and pregnant women and the old and infirmed (collateral damage my ...).
You and I don't see eye to eye on unrepentant homosexuals in the congregation, but no Christian should use violence, or any coercion really, to silence others. No Christian should be expected to be heard if unwilling to engage others in real searching for the ultimate truth.
Censoring xxx porn is fine with me, for instance. I will though debate with Larry Flynt whether or not that's right while not allowing his images on my site. I trust you understand where I'm drawing the lines that Google is disallowing in their Blog Search.
The first time I noticed Google starting to clamp down was when I rejected Soulforce. I had thousands of posts being returned by Google Blog Search, but that one just wouldn't show up. I asked them about the censorship. They refused to reply, and over a period of several weeks, all but 3 of my posts disappeared.
In fact, I got into "trouble" with a bunch of Derek Webb lovers after viewing and posting about a video of his I saw on account of your post on it. The comments I received would have been staggering to the mind had I not already been exposed to so many people who just refuse to or can't read. So many came to tell me the obvious while completely missing my points. Oh well.
I don't want to leave you with a bad feeling. I'm glad I saw your questioning post about Derek Webb's video and that I posted on the subject too. I've also watched some N. T. Wright videos on account of you. I'd read some of this stuff. He's not as spiritual as I am, but it's worth knowing more about what a large group of people are being told and apparently following in large measure.
Anyway, even though as I say we don't see 100% eye to eye on everything, I do know that you want to do no harm. The question is what is and isn't harmful in the end.
Peace to your family, house, and to you, Mike.
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)