With sadness I note:
(1) No information about any connected allegation or circumstance
(2) Nobody is being asked to pray
(3) Aren’t there any Christian run hosting services?
This sounds like the kind of psyop that Satan launches.
Christians will probably weather this better than the more carnal FR would, if push comes to shove. Instead of just “oh poor endangered us,” devoted Christians’ attitude is “how do we get to the next victory for the Lord’s sake?”
Many people have been asking a similar question about alternatives to Fakebook and Twitter. Alternatives? I guess Gab was one and now they've been kicked off the Internet.
Yes, a Christian run hosting service needs to either be found or created.
**(3) Aren’t there any Christian run hosting services?**
EWTN
Ave Maria Radio
Relevant Radio
Others?
See post 83 And,
Vimeo kowtows to gay sex offender, deletes conservative news outlet’s videos
LifeSiteNews threatened by Maine homosexual over July 12 story
Convicted gay sex offender uses scare tactics to shut down website on truth about homosexuality
Aren’t there any Christian run hosting services?
This overview via excerpts may help, concerning Cloudflare, whose policy is, as stated vby CEO Matthew Prince, "One of the greatest strengths of the United States is a belief that speech, particularly political speech, is sacred. A website, of course, is nothing but speech ... A website is speech. It is not a bomb. There is no imminent danger it creates and no provider has an affirmative obligation to monitor and make determinations about the theoretically harmful nature of speech a site may contain."
For all customers Cloudflare offers an "I'm Under Attack Mode" setting. Cloudflare claims this can mitigate advanced Layer 7 attacks by presenting a JavaScript computational challenge which must be completed by a user's browser before the user can access a website - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare
But who dropped the American neo-Nazi website "The Daily Stormer" as a customer. Which I would do also, but as said, if a host can deny such based on its content being objectionable, it can deny conservative content on the same basis (unless perhaps the one denied wanted to promote the homosexual agenda or reverse racism.). This issue led to this opinion piece in the NYT no less, The Terrifying Power of Internet Censors :
Generally speaking, there are two kinds of corporate players on the internet: companies that build infrastructure through which content flows, and companies that seek to curate content and create a community.
Internet service providers like Verizon and Comcast, domain name servers, web hosts and security services providers like Cloudflare are all the former — or the “pipe.” They typically don’t look at the content their clients and customers are putting up, they just give them the means to do it and let it flow.
Social media platforms like Facebook are the latter. They encourage their users to create, share and engage with content — so they look at content all the time and decide whether they want to allow hateful material like that of neo-Nazis to stay up.
One of the additional difficulties with Cloudflare is that it is not so much a piece of pipe as it is a service. Specifically, it is a paid-for-protection service. Having to hire Cloudflare to protect your website is like having to hire security to protect you from attackers when you speak in the public square.
Matthew Prince, Cloudflare’s chief executive, acknowledged how much power his company has, and what’s at stake. “The internet is a really important resource for everyone,” he said in an interview with TechCrunch, “but there’s a very limited set of companies that control it and there’s such little accountability to us that it really is quite a dangerous thing.” - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/opinion/cloudflare-daily-stormer-charlottesville.html