An actual example of the powerful “suppressing the views of anyone they disagree with” would be FtB preventing xian schools, homeopaths, scammers, et al, from having, and this is important, their own blog network where they talk about whatever they fancy.

Or to take Dr. Carrier’s example, the homeopath can build his own damn house and plaster it with billboards. Subject to any applicable HOA constraints, of course.

Huh? So, if a con-man wanted to advertise his overpriced homeopathy remedies on the front of your house, you would regard it as unethical to refuse him?

You aren’t making any logical sense here. Free speech in no universe means compelling others to use their resources to market your products.

To the contrary, free speech means getting to choose what you say and what you endorse and what you are associated with, and what you don’t believe, don’t endorse, and don’t associate with.

The con-men can get their own billboards. They have no right to use ours.

That’s weird. I’ll report it.

Yes, absolutely. That’s how the powerful justify suppressing the views of anyone they disagree with. The powerful don’t trust ordinary folk to decide correctly for themselves.

Is doing that ethical?

I normally don’t subscribe to threads, but I did to this one. Just now I unsubbed it, and not only did I get confirms from your blog, I also got multiple replies from the old Thunderf00t, Christina Rad, and something that seems to be called Jesus’ General. It appears they are set on some sort of ‘reply all’ setting.

Best to report those in-line, since they are handled by the individual blogger (when our spam software obviously hasn’t already caught them, we have to go in and tag it manually). Our tech people won’t have much to do with that.

My personal guidelines for reporting are to report sexist crap and obvious scams. (Sometimes that’s a twofer!) But I’m not reporting the Xian colleges and such.

One cannot avert their eyes from what they came to look at. Or maybe you (they?) don’t know how a human field of vision works?

But also, “FtB doesn’t want to support that or be associated with that” are two other reasons to nix an ad that “averting eyes” won’t resolve.

Free speech includes the freedom not to advertise for produces and services you believe are harmful or counter to your values.

On why you probably shouldn’t do that, see my other comment on this.

I’ll pass this along.