Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Magically Ridiculous ([info]staroverthebay) wrote in [info]unfunnybusiness,
@ 2009-11-02 16:04:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
EBay removes anti-abortion memorabilia from site
(posted here because there is definite unfunny involved, but at the same time, it restores some tiny bit of faith in humanity... or it did for me at least.)

So... you of course all have heard about the murder of Dr. George Tiller, an abortion surgeon who was killed by anti-abortion activists. And more recently, the man on trial for the murder is being supported by people who want to raise money for his defense by selling things on eBay.

Well, eBay just flashed their authority with their own site and yanked all the items that were put up for that purpose.

Cue butthurt of the activists who want to raise money. The chief cry seems to be "censorship" (nevermind that eBay has its terms of use and policies spelled out in painstaking detail for anyone who cares to read.)

I must admit that eBay has risen in my esteem from this. They could have turned a blind eye, but they didn't, and they followed through with their threats.

(emphasis mine)

EBay removes anti-abortion memorabilia from site

By ROXANA HEGEMAN
Associated Press Writer


WICHITA, Kan. (AP) -- Online auction house eBay has removed items that were posted for sale by anti-abortion activists trying to raise money for defense of a man accused of killing a Kansas abortion provider, the company said Monday.

Supporters of Scott Roeder - one in Kansas City, Mo. and the other in Des Moines, Iowa - posted various items late Sunday in separate eBay auctions including an Army of God manual, an underground publication for anti-abortion militants that describes ways to shut down clinics.

After about five hours, eBay removed 10 items, activists said. The final two items were removed by late Monday afternoon.

San Jose, Calif.-based eBay said the anti-abortion memorabilia violated its listing polices.

"Today, eBay removed several listings on our site that violated several of our policies including our offensive materials' policy. This policy prohibits items that promote or glorify hatred, violence, racial, sexual, or religious intolerance, or promote organizations with such views," eBay said in a statement. The company would not say how many or which items it removed.

Roeder is charged with first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the May 31 shooting of Dr. George Tiller at his Wichita church. Anti-abortion activists are trying to raise money for Roeder, who has been appointed public defenders but was considering hiring private lawyers. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Among the last items removed from eBay was a worn Bible once owned by Shelley Shannon, an Oregon woman who shot and wounded Tiller in 1993 and was later convicted in a series of abortion clinic arsons and bombings. The other was a signed book of religious teachings written by Ohio anti-abortion activist Michael Bray.

Those two items were posted by Iowa activist Dave Leach who said he escaped the initial purge by eBay because he deliberately used misspellings and other devices to make the items difficult to find.

"Because of eBay's promise to take it down, all I wanted to accomplish is to make it so it would at least survive long enough for eBay's lawyers to look at my article and hopefully decide I am not their enemy," Leach said Monday.

In the description of the Bible, which had 13 bidders and a high bid of approximately $60 before it was taken down, Leach wrote that Shannon had given it to him a decade ago when she was transferred from state to federal prison.

"Our goal is an end to vio-lence (cq) against abortionists, and against babies, through restoring the Constitutional Right to Trial by Jury, even in abortion prevention cases. Proceeds from this auction will be devoted to that end," the listing said.

Roeder's supporters said they want jurors to hear the so-called necessity defense, which claims the killing was necessary to prevent a greater harm like abortion.

"I am not doing this because I enjoy the publicity as it has panned out so far," Leach said after his postings were taken down. "I wish I could talk with people. This whole thing is a censorship. The judge censors the defense from the jury and here is eBay censoring our efforts to try to end this censorship."

Kansas City activist Regina Dinwiddie said the 10 items she posted raised several hundred dollars from at least a dozen bidders before eBay removed them. She vowed Roeder's supporters will continue to try to raise funds for his defense.

"I am very disappointed in eBay," Dinwiddie said. "I thought that was the last bastion of free enterprise in America with no political viewpoint, but I see I was mistaken about that."

She said other removed items included three drawings commissioned by Roeder in jail and signed by him, a prison cookbook written by Shannon, several anti-abortion books and bumper stickers, and an oil painting by Clayton Waagner, the man who sent hundred of anthrax scare letters to abortion providers in 2001.

© 2009 The Associated Press





(Is it just me, or are these people trying to out-crazy PETA?)


(Post a new comment)


[info]faultypremise
2009-11-03 01:52 am UTC (link)
Roeder's supporters said they want jurors to hear the so-called necessity defense, which claims the killing was necessary to prevent a greater harm like abortion.

Because killing doctors is totally *pro-life*.

(Reply to this)


[info]kijikun
2009-11-03 02:41 am UTC (link)
What the hell is wrong with these people?

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]pyratejenni
2009-11-03 02:47 am UTC (link)
They've drunk the Kool-aid, and believe the bullshit the anti-choice talking heads politicos spew -- and think said talking heads believe it, too.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]librarianmouse
2009-11-03 02:53 am UTC (link)
I understand the "abortion is killing," mindset, but I do not understand the "killing is bad, and we're going to kill you to show you just how bad it is" mindset. It makes my brain go all kerblooey.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]platedlizard
2009-11-03 03:21 am UTC (link)
It makes sense if you realize they are sociopaths.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]soupspooks
2009-11-03 03:24 am UTC (link)
It also makes sense if you view it from their perspective of "We are going to war". People kill in the name of peace and justice all the time. Stop the lesser evil, etc.

I still think it's revolting.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


ariadne484
2009-11-03 02:45 pm UTC (link)
Yeah. The Christian Soldier rhetoric gets a lot of use.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sandglass
2009-11-03 03:27 am UTC (link)
This. The guy wasn't even your regular abortion doctor who kills the healthy and unhealthy alike, he was pretty much exclusively aborting babies who couldn't live much long after birth.

Out of curiousity, are the major pro-life organizations speaking out against this sort of bullshit?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]sistercoyote
2009-11-04 10:33 pm UTC (link)
No.

Of if they are, it's along the lines of "well, we don't approve, but he had it coming."

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]queencallipygos
2009-11-03 03:22 pm UTC (link)
Interestingly enough, I've been having another discussion elsewhere on a separate topic -- and it made the penny drop on THIS issue for me.

I got caught up in a whole back-and-forth with someone in the midst of a discussion about self-defense about the wisdom of "get a gun and just shoot the guy". Somehow that got into a conversation on pacifism and how killing was a last resort -- but my rival spun that into a whole, "oh, so you think killing is wrong? What if you could go back in time and kill Hitler? What if you could kill the Hutu rebels who were slaughtering Tutsis in Rwanda?" Basically he took a whole "if you can save the lives of others by killing someone, it's not morally wrong because your'e stopping genocide" approach.

And that's when I realized that that's what's happening HERE. It's insane troll logic, but in their minds, they are doing the equivalent of "if you could go back in time and shoot Hitler, you'd save 6 million Jews, so killing Hitler would have been morally okay."

So in short: it makes sense to them because of Godwin's.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]the__ivorytower
2009-11-03 04:37 pm UTC (link)
The reason you don't go back in time to kill Hitler is because it results in hammy full motion video.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]napalmnacey
2009-11-03 07:47 pm UTC (link)
No no, killing Hitler is messy and unnecessary. Bribe the art school he applied for repeatedly to let him in and let him paint to his black little heart's content.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]defenestrate
2009-11-03 08:56 pm UTC (link)
What if you could go back in time and kill Hitler?

This has already been covered in Wikihistory by Desmond Warzel.

Excerpt:
11/15/2104
At 14:52:28, FreedomFighter69 wrote:
Reporting my first temporal excursion since joining IATT: have just returned from 1936 Berlin, having taken the place of one of Leni Riefenstahl's cameramen and assassinated Adolf Hitler during the opening of the Olympic Games. Let a free world rejoice!

At 14:57:44, SilverFox316 wrote:
Back from 1936 Berlin; incapacitated FreedomFighter69 before he could pull his little stunt. Freedomfighter69, as you are a new member, please read IATT Bulletin 1147 regarding the killing of Hitler before your next excursion. Failure to do so may result in your expulsion per Bylaw 223.

At 18:06:59, BigChill wrote:
Take it easy on the kid, SilverFox316; everybody kills Hitler on their first trip. I did. It always gets fixed within a few minutes, what's the harm?

At 18:33:10, SilverFox316 wrote:
Easy for you to say, BigChill, since to my recollection you've never volunteered to go back and fix it. You think I've got nothing better to do?

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]telegramsam
2009-11-03 06:04 pm UTC (link)
The problem is that you're trying to use logic to think about the subject. Logic is SATAN'S TOOL used to SPREAD LIBERAL LIES.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]chibikaijuu
2009-11-06 10:41 pm UTC (link)
It's not an unusual ethical stance. If you believe that killing one person will stop the deaths of thousands or millions more, some people would consider you morally obligated to kill that person. (There are varying degrees of this - some people believe that "the good of the many outweighs the good of the few" to the extreme of allowing the death of an innocent person if that death stops the deaths of many others, some only believe that killing this person is acceptable if they are directly, actively contributing to the deaths themselves, etc.)

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]platedlizard
2009-11-03 03:24 am UTC (link)
(Is it just me, or are these people trying to out-crazy PETA?)

They already out-crazy them, PETA only kills adoptable pets. They don't kill people.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]telegramsam
2009-11-03 06:05 pm UTC (link)
Hmmm... they have been known to fund nuts like E.L.F. in the past, and other domestic terrorist groups. So no, not directly maybe, but they're not wholly unfamiliar with such territory.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]issendai
2009-11-04 08:38 pm UTC (link)
I'm having difficulty respecting any terrorist group with the acronym "E.L.F."

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kelmendi
2009-11-05 02:13 am UTC (link)
I thought the Earth Liberation Front had a "massive property damage but no killing" policy. I think they've actually been pretty careful about it.

Not that setting fire to other people's things is okay. Just better than killing people.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]hallidae
2009-11-07 06:43 pm UTC (link)
I don't know about the E.L.F, but they've funded the A.L.F. too, and at least in the past fifteen years or so, they haven't particularly given a damn whether humans get hurt or die during their stunts, no matter what they claim in their official charter. The fact that they claim to be against violence towards all animals, human and non-human, and then have incidents like beating a man nearly to death with pickaxe handles, or kidnapping and branding a journalist with a hot iron because he didn't like their tactics... yeah, no.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]watersword
2009-11-03 04:24 am UTC (link)
Censorship: does not mean what you think it means.

Free speech, as Conor Clarke put it beautifully recently in an Atlantic Monthly</a> blog, "is a 'negative' right: It prevents the government from silencing you. But it doesn't guarantee you the right to a soapbox or a megaphone or an audience."

There are a couple of important words there, and one I'd like to emphasize is GOVERNMENT. EBay? Can do whatever the fuck it wants, as it is not the government; eBay can silence you until the cows come home.

In conclusion: fuck you, fuck your stunted understanding of civil rights and liberties, fuck your inability to see the contradictions in your own fucking statements, and get your fucking opinions off my body.

[Editorial you used throughout.]

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]watersword
2009-11-03 04:24 am UTC (link)
...ooooops.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]staroverthebay
2009-11-03 05:13 am UTC (link)
Exactly. Ebay owns its site, and it can do whatever it wants. When you make an account there, you agree to their terms and policies. Violating those terms and then being punished for it is not "censorship" FFS.

People sure like to play the victim, but they really do need to learn what the fuck they're talking out of their asses about.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]mmanurere
2009-11-03 06:00 am UTC (link)
Not all states take the "it's only restriction of rights when something calling itself the government does it" approach. Here in California, free-speech protections apply anywhere open to the public.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]staroverthebay
2009-11-03 07:04 am UTC (link)
Nevertheless, eBay has policies that they're very clear on, and the site is privately owned. If the owners of eBay don't want that kind of thing sold on their site, they're perfectly within their rights to ban/remove it.

Additionally, when you make an account with them, you agree to their terms and policies. Not bothering to read the policies is of course your choice, but you're still bound by them because you agreed to them. As they say, ignorance of the law/rules is no excuse, especially when the info is easily accessible.

A person has the right to try to sell something there, but eBay also has the right to remove it if they don't agree with it. It is, after all, EBAY's website, not the random seller's.

(NOTE: generic editorial "you" used here, not directed at anyone personally)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]mmanurere
2009-11-03 08:58 am UTC (link)
Still, in a sense it's a service open to the public -- but even in that case, refusing to sell items which promote terrorism (or to support a fundraiser taking the same position) is a pretty reasonable policy. It's not a free speech matter, not so much because eBay is a private site (think about it -- if all means of communication are effectively privatized, does that eliminate the right to speak?) but because promoting terrorism doesn't fall into the "free speech" category in the first place.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]librarianmouse
2009-11-03 03:26 pm UTC (link)
Exactly. One person's right to free speech only exists as long as it's not violating someone else's right to safety or privacy. With these nutbombs, the sort of "speech" they want to use will violate the rights of others, which makes it not okay.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]also_not_a_pipe
2009-11-03 05:33 am UTC (link)
"Today, eBay removed several listings on our site that violated several of our policies including our offensive materials' policy. This policy prohibits items that promote or glorify hatred, violence, racial, sexual, or religious intolerance, or promote organizations with such views"

Fuck yes, go eBay! I'm just glad to see someone call these people on what they're doing. Sorry, but only someone who's been hit repeatedly in the head with a hammer would believe that they want to "end violence against abortionists" if they're raising the money to do so by selling owned by someone who shot one.

(Reply to this)


[info]adevyish
2009-11-03 06:05 am UTC (link)
Form letter smackdown!

(Reply to this)


[info]bubosquared
2009-11-03 10:26 am UTC (link)
"I am very disappointed in eBay," Dinwiddie said. "I thought that was the last bastion of free enterprise in America with no political viewpoint, but I see I was mistaken about that."

... What is this I don't even. o_O

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]persona
2009-11-03 07:53 pm UTC (link)
That was pretty much my reaction. What in the hell.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]bubosquared
2009-11-04 11:08 am UTC (link)
I have to wonder if people like this actually hear what they're saying. I mean, what? o_O

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]smashingstars
2009-11-03 11:30 am UTC (link)
Among the last items removed from eBay was a worn Bible once owned by Shelley Shannon, an Oregon woman who shot and wounded Tiller in 1993 and was later convicted in a series of abortion clinic arsons and bombings. ...other removed items included ... a prison cookbook written by Shannon, several anti-abortion books and bumper stickers, and an oil painting by Clayton Waagner, the man who sent hundred of anthrax scare letters to abortion providers in 2001.

Items created and owned by convicted felons of violent acts, people who tried to kill others because of religious beliefs. And these bastards want to say that eBay not allowing this stuff is the equivalent to a violation of the First Amendment. Unbelievable.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]profsmith
2009-11-05 12:13 am UTC (link)
Don't you get it? Only they have real free speech!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]brennalarose
2009-11-04 08:24 pm UTC (link)
Go eBay!

(Reply to this)


[info]ardath_rekha
2009-11-05 02:47 am UTC (link)
Okay, I've been pissed with eBay for a while because of a bunch of things they've done with their interface and search engines that have made the site cumbersome and unpleasant (IMO) to navigate...


...but they just won all of my love back. Seriously. They can now make their pages as butt-ugly and counterintuitive as they wanna, and I will go on loving them LONG TIME.

(Reply to this)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map