Verizon Blocks Opt-In Pro-Choice SMS > controversial or unsavory-- how about LEGAL / NORMAL

reply to PhoenixDown

Re: controversial or unsavory-- how about LEGAL / NORMAL

reply to P Ness
P Ness,

Not an opinion but fact. Whatever your own views you cannot refute facts. Murder is murder this has nothing to do with Verizons stance, that is a separate issue. This is also not a religious issue, abortion is akin to me taking one of my kids out back and killing them, same end result don't you agree? Rock N' Roll does not kill people

Thanks and enjoy your day and be thankful your parents are not killers

reply to PhoenixDown
I am not opposed to teaching kids at the proper age about birth control and in fact I advocate parents do so as soon as they are mature enough to understand and grasp the facts, being up front and honest with children about sex and birth control is not corrupting children and I am not a hyprocrite, I do not tell my children one thing all the while doing the opposite. We do need to be up front and truthful with our children. Denying children information about birth control as well as protection from STD's is wrong kids are going to learn about sex and engage in sex even if we hide our heads in the sand. I am pro-children but education is the key.
thanks

reply to stevephl
While I agree with your opinion on abortion, I still have a problem with Verizon blocking messages like that. While I despise NARAL, it and other organizations have every right to send out messages to the people who have requested them. If they were sending out spam, that would be one thing, but it looks like this one was strictly opt-in.

One of the first posts for this article called this a "dangerous precedent", and I have to agree. While you may not care if messages from NARAL get blocked, it's only a matter of time before they start blocking something you do care about.

reply to ReneM
ReneM,
Please cite the relevant portions of the Constitution that make killing of kids legal? The part about "Life and the pursuit of happiness" part would seem to indicate to me that these children you want to so readily off are being denied their Constitutional rights.

My take the Rove V. Wade debacle will be over turned and abortions once again banned. After all its for the "Children"

So your assertion that this is what separates us from the likes of North Korea, Iran Iraq (Irak?) and so forth is based on our government sanctioning the killing of children? Do I have that right? Hmm isn't that what the regimes of the countries you mention do as a normal part of doing business? Wow maybe we are closer to those countries in terms of our actions and deeds then what we thought, who would have thought?
Thanks for educating me on this very important issue.

reply to TheWickerMan
Actually while I oppose abortion I do agree that Verizon is probably coming down on the wrong side of this very contentious issue.

reply to stevephl
StevePL -

I'm glad you are taking a proactive stance regarding the proper education of our children but there are still ALOT of people out there who do not feel that way and compromises need to be made by all sides if the issue of abortion is to be satisfactorily addressed.

Getting back to the topic: If customers are opting in to receive text messages, then the actual subject of the message is irrelevant. Abortion (regardless of ones feelings) is LEGAL as defined by the Supreme Court. It is up to the law makers to change that legal standing and not the telecommunications to make the decide on the behalf of any party.

reply to stevephl

reply to stevephl
I was certainly pleased to read the responses to this thread and see that it stayed on point...blocking content, not about the issue itself...until stevephl ruined my faith that there could be a discussion of the issue of blocking content w/o the insertion of someones social and political agenda. As one who used to live next door to a womens' clinic that performed abortions...let me tell you something about the whacos that used to hang out there EVERY day. They dressed as the grim reeper, had huge posters of bloody babies that they waved in the face of everyone who had the misfortune of walking by (this was across the street from a museum...so lots of foot traffic. Screamed bible verses at women going there (even if not for abortion but prenatal care...yeah thats right women who wanted to HAVE children). They were the most VILE people I've ever come in contact with in my life. I took much pleasure in taking the water hose to them if they even crept an inch on my property. Is it any wonder that THESE people want to dictate content you see. Be afraid...be very afraid. I am. I have rights to, and I will protect them as well

reply to stevephl

said by stevephl:

P Ness,

Not an opinion but fact. Whatever your own views you cannot refute facts. Murder is murder this has nothing to do with Verizons stance, that is a separate issue. This is also not a religious issue, abortion is akin to me taking one of my kids out back and killing them, same end result don't you agree? Rock N' Roll does not kill people

Thanks and enjoy your day and be thankful your parents are not killers

reply to Placebo
Of course they should. From the New York Times article on the subject:

"Professor Wu pointed to a historical analogy. In the 19th century, he said, Western Union, the telegraph company, engaged in discrimination, based on the political views of people who sought to send telegrams. “One of the eventual reactions was the common carrier rule,” Professor Wu said, which required telegraph and then phone companies to accept communications from all speakers on all topics."

This is the exact same issue, except now the text is on a cell phone screen instead of a piece of paper.

reply to PhoenixDown
Um, what?

I'm all for our Constitution and agree that our country's population is starting to loose sight of what the country was founded on. One thing people forget and this is probably the worst, as this country was built on Capitalism and the means to gain rewards for hard work and being proud of that. What does this have to do with Verizon filtering service? Well, for starters it's their network, not the peoples network. They paid for it, they built it and they maintain it. So long as they abid by their policy to their customers, they can do whatever they want with their own property whether physical or intellectual as long as it doesn't break any laws.

This is no different than Walmart offering censored only versions of music or choosing not to sell certain types of music.

Please make sure that as a Constitution loving citizen of the US you don't forget that Capitalism drives our country's companies and work ethics. Lets not try to force companies to act like socialist entities of the government because we don't like something. Instead, BUY service from somewhere else and force the market to change.

This is probably not more than a soap box rant but jez, people here so often forget that net neutrality battles will be one with the paying customer's decisions. If at the end of the day you don't like something don't pay for it, suggest an alternative and wait for the company that sees the light to offer the service you want. The worst thing that can happen is any kind of government control, they always fail... the only thing it's been somewhat good at for the last 200 plus years is enforcing our constitutional rights, and I'm ok with that.
--
»www.fairtax.org

Lumber Jack:

Our country may have been built on Captialism but it was founded on the notion of freedom and liberty for all.

In regards to your example, if I didn't like the censored version sold by Walmart, i could go to a thousand different stores and buy it elsewhere (Target, K-Mart, Sam Goodies, Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Best Buy, buy.com, etc) -- however we have very few telecommunications companies. They wanted to merge and grow in size, then they have to need to be fair and uphold thier end of their agreement to thier customers which is to provide an unfettered service.

reply to Lumberjack

Re: controversial or unsavory-- how about LEGAL / NORMAL

quote:

---

Instead, BUY service from somewhere else and force the market to change.

---

reply to Placebo
Yes, common carrier -- I expect them to provide opt-in access to their network, for their customers, for any legal content.

reply to stevephl

reply to Placebo

reply to Lumberjack
When your business is built on and assets reside on public property (wireline or frequency) then you're subject to the will of the public. For that subjection you get the exclusive right to use the public's asset in a for-profit venture.

reply to P Ness
Ohhhh, snap!