Posted on 04/08/2008 4:21:51 PM PDT by wagglebee
LONDON, April 8, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A pro-life and pro-family Christian lobbying and education organisation is taking the internet giant Google to court over the latter's refusal to allow advertisements about abortion that contain religious content. When the Christian Institute, a UK registered charity, asked Google for site-targeted advertising, the company refused citing the proposed ad for "inappropriate content". The Institute is suing, saying the refusal constituted discrimination on the grounds of religious belief, a violation of Britain's anti-discrimination laws.
A spokesman for the Institute said, "For many people, Google is the doorway to the internet. It is an influential gatekeeper to the marketplace of debate. 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."
The company told the Institute, "Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain 'abortion and religion-related content'".
The Christian Institute had asked for an AdWords ad, one that offers pay-per-click (PPC) advertising. The refused ad would have read, "UK abortion law: news and views on abortion from the Christian Institute. http://www.christian.org.uk". Had the company accepted the ad, internet users putting the word "abortion" into the search engine would have seen an ad for the Christian Institute on the right side of the search page.
The company, however, has no such qualms when it comes to ads for abortionists such as Marie Stopes International, who have an AdWord ad that appears now when the word "abortion" is typed into the search engine. Google is the world's largest and most successful internet search engine company, with over 80 million users a month.
The Christian Institute is a "mainstream evangelical" non-demoninational registered charity promoting the Christian religion and worldview in the UK. It produces policy papers and educational material on political issues such as marriage and the family, the protection of children from exploitation, and pro-life issues.
The group says, "We are committed to defending the institution of marriage, and believe in the sanctity of human life from conception. We believe that the rule of law is the basis of order and civilisation, but our national life needs Christian underpinning." The Institute also recognises that there are many non-Christians who uphold the same principles.
The UK's Equality Act 2006 prohibits discrimination based on religious belief in the provision of goods and services. The Institute pointed out that Google handles an enormous volume of pornographic materials, and cited the company for hypocrisy.
This is not the first time that Google has come under criticism for a liberal bias in life and family issues. In 2005 the company turned down requests for ad space by RightMarch.com, a conservative web site that lobbies on a variety of US political issues.
Again in 2007, the company temporarily blocked the weblog of a Brazilian Christian activist and writer who was using their affiliated Blogger service. The site's contents were removed and replaced with a statement that read, "This blog is being reviewed for possible violations of the Blogger Terms of Service, and can only be opened by the authors." The blog's author, Julio Severo, said that Google did not inform him of the reasons for blocking the site, but the removal occurred after a bitter campaign against him by homosexual activists on Google's partner service, Orkut.com.
Colin Hart, Director of The Christian Institute, said, "Google promotes itself as a company committed to the ideals of free speech and the free exchange of ideas. It is against this standard that Google's anti-religious policy is so unjust."
"To describe abortion and religion-related content as 'unacceptable content', while at the same time advertising pornography, is ridiculous."
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Student Sees Problems With H.S. Text
AP via SFGate | 4/8/8 | Nancy Zuckerbrod, AP Education Writer
Posted on Tuesday, April 08, 2008 07:20:46 PM by SmithL
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1998695/posts?page=1
Instead of using AdWords, I just optimized VirtueMedia’s website for the keyword phrase, “pro-life advertising”.
We’re number one.
I guarantee you that if Obama’s Church Hospital wanted to run an Google AdWord advert promoting their abortion up until the moment of birth (and beyond) policy and mentioned that their church teachings had no restrictions on the killing that Google would accept it.
That's what I'd do twelve times a day if I knew pro-abortion groups were paying for clicks.
“This will be hard to win, they’re probably looking for a settlement.
I’m against this lawsuit because it’s seems too frivolous,
and I cannot see the discrimination.”
Actually under that new English law the lawsuit has a very good chance.”
I'm racking my brain trying to figure out what that is. :-/
UK’s Equality Act 2006
True, but in a perfect world one shouldn't be forced by courts to enter into contracts. I realize the left does it all them time....
“Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain ‘abortion and religion-related content’”.
Whoever said that hasn’t seen the type of Google ads I’ve been getting on my largest website. I just went to the main page (http://xenohistorian.faithweb.com/main.html), and here is what I saw:
“Bible/world history chart”
“The Bible as a timeline”
“Bible Study, Genesis 1-11”
“History and archaeology”
“New book on healing”
“The Antichrist: Free book”
“Revelation 17 reveals”
“Free Bible CD”
At least six religious-themed ads there. A Moslem dating service ad also appears quite often. What does Google consider those, anyway?
Interesting. Google news search not only excludes FR (also, I have rarely seen a web search result to FR, other than when I use the site: filter), but also includes leftist hate sites (which are op-ed, not news, in the first place) such as HuffPo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.