Gosnell Filmmakers Quit Kickstarter, Claiming Censorship

National Review ^ | April 1, 2014 2:44 PM | Josh Encinias

[GirlShortstop]

Some use their site to promote good and censor evil. Some use their site to promote evil and censor good.
Now we know which category Kickstarter is in.
yup.

[SoCal Pubbie]

Actually it’s not censorship at all but political bias, and as others have pointed out, blacklisting.

[WayneS]

I’m pretty sure this story is the first time I’ve ever seen the word ‘ankle’ used as a verb.

[galtman]

He certainly has an executive pardon coming from Obongo ... this guy probably is on The Blackhouse Christmas card list!

[MacMattico]

If they would have just said “Gosnell, a man who once had a thought for two seconds at age 8 of becoming a Catholic Priest” (obviously not true) the site would have let them do whatever they wanted. Because twisting the story of a serial killer into one that has even the ever so slightest hint of a religious mass murderer would win an Oscar for best documentary. The left would have contributed heavily. And then, hey, after the donations are in it's like everything else— filmmakers/editors “creative license”. And oops! We were wrong about the Priest part!

Seriously, yeah Kickstarter is a private company but their hypocrisy will give other fundraising sites, including those for sick children, a bad name. And if the movie makers were gay would kickstarter have to run their project description as described? After all, we already know you have to bake a cake at your private business for gay couples even if you don't want to. (I still can't understand why you would want to eat something someone was forced to prepare for you, when you could give the business to some one who thinks the same as you.)

[tbw2]

Liberals decry the McCarthy era blacklisting of Communists while developing a similar blacklist of conservatives today.

[This Just In]

“Thank you Captain Beside-the-Point-Obvious.” :^D

You forgot to add:

Captain Failed-To-Read-Up-On-The-Issue

[This Just In]

Do yourself a favor and familiarize yourself with the facts before voicing an uneducated opinion.

The issue is not about censorship. This issue in this regard concerns a website which claims to support and serve individuals seeking to enlist financial donors to their film projects. Due to the topic of the documentary, the producers of the film were singled out under false claims. Claims which the producers qualified by showing Kickstarters bias as well as their hypocrisy.

Get a clue.

[a fool in paradise]

I looked at the kickstarter community standards. I guess they found this to be "offensive". If someone's comic book about Thor being cooler than Jesus because this "son of God" kicks ass rather than letting himself get crucified (which is stated as such in the kickstarter campaign) is okay, then they need to spell out in detail what "offenses" are permissible.

There is a political litmus test and we'd be fools not to speak out against the double standard.

I'm unable to find that comic fundraiser today, but I did find this one:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1159742006/space-bastards-comic-book

Clearly violent and bloody imagery is NOT prohibited in kickstarter campaigns, let alone names and images "offensive" to some peoples' beliefs.

[a fool in paradise]

And if the movie makers were gay would kickstarter have to run their project description as described? After all, we already know you have to bake a cake at your private business for gay couples even if you don't want to. (I still can't understand why you would want to eat something someone was forced to prepare for you, when you could give the business to some one who thinks the same as you.)

You bring up a good point about "denial of services".

If a photographer declines to accept a potential client's same sex wedding (in a state that does not recognize same sex marriages, no less), could he survive claiming that it "goes against 'his' community standards" (which by evidence of Kickstarter, do not need to be explicitly stated, just vague references to being offensive)?