Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Sneaky sneaky

From the "Whenever You Think They've Scraped The Bottom Of The Barrel, They Lift The Barrel" Department.

Okay. We already know all too well how sly, sneaky and stealthy the fetus fetishists are, but today I stumbled upon a story that shows their tactics have reached another new nadir. (I won't dare say they've bottomed right out, I've said it before so many times.)

"The Christian Institute", a group in the UK devoted to, I don't know, whatever the fuck it is they do, is taking The Google to court for refusing their anti-abortion propaganda. Get a load of this:
"A Christian group is suing Google over the internet giant's refusal to take its anti-abortion adverts.

The Christian Institute, a "non-denominational Christian charity", wanted to pay Google so that whenever the word "abortion" was typed into the popular search engine, its link would appear on the side of the screen.

The link would have read: "UK abortion law - news and views on abortion from the Christian Institute.""

See how this works? Some unsuspecting person is looking for information about something that should be nobody's business but their's and their doctor's, tries to do a Google search and gets bushwhacked! by a seemingly innocuous link to a site with "information" about abortion. Except we know what happens when that unsuspecting person goes *click*: they're treated to a heapin' helpin' of anti-abortion propaganda (spiced up with a dash of anti-gay proselytism). Very sneaky, fetus fetishists... but Google isn't buying it.

Of course, the fact that Google would refuse to be a party to this kind of disinformation campaign is nothing less than religious persecution and the stifling of free speech, so it's Hi-ho, hi-ho, off to court we go! CI spokeman Mike Judge (appropriate name or what?) sayeth:

"If there is to be a free exchange of ideas then Google cannot give special free speech rights to secular groups whilst censoring religious views.

"To say that religious sites with material on abortion are 'unacceptable content' (while) advertising pornography is ridiculous."

The group was supported by the Christian former Tory minister Ann Widdecombe, who said: "It does seem to me to be the most appalling and blatant case of religious discrimination and also to be a very silly attempt to stifle due debate."

Except, as one of the commenters at the Daily Mail points out:

And amen to that.