Occasionally I post things to FaceBook that I don’t post here, because I don’t have the time to go into the detail I think is needed to make it a good blog entry, but on FB you can post just a link and let people make their own comments, without having to go into any detail at all.
So today I was going to post a link to FB, about the historicity (or lack there of), contradictions, of the typically understood stories of the life and death of jesus. This link is to a well thought out article that goes into GREAT detail as to why he takes the stance he does.
So when I go to post this link to FB, I receive the following message:
In all honesty, I have not read the full article yet, much less his supporting links (so far I have read the first few sections, and skimmed the rest, hoping to come back to it after work and read the rest). But from what I have read/skimmed, there is nothing offensive, nothing abusive, nothing other than the reasonable opinion of one person, backed up by what seems to be quite a bit of evidence.
While obviously not everybody will agree with the position the author takes; to call this article abusive is itself an abuse of the system set in place by FB to stop:
content that we deem to be harmful, threatening, unlawful, defamatory, infringing, abusive, inflammatory, harassing, vulgar, obscene, fraudulent, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;
The purpose of my post here is not neccesarily to discuss the arguments made on this link (I will most certainly do a full post on that at a later date), but to discuss the merits of that link being banned by FB, whether those who tagged it as “abusive” are themselves abusing the sytstem, and where the line should be with regards to material that is actually “abusive” vs content that somebody disagrees with.