Paula:

As you know I would not argue for a minute about your right to include or exclude anything you wish in your blog. It is your space on the web --- yours and PT's.

As you also know, I disgree strongly with your decision to delete the postings to your Homophobia blog. As a gay man I was absolutely delighted when you posted the blog. I was even more delighted when I saw the two anti-gay comments appear precisely because they were so blatantly ignorant. We couldn't have asked for better examples of the kinds of ignorance and misinformation that GLBTetc people have had to endure. We couldn't have asked for a better range of sources --- from a very intelligent individual to someone on a limited ladder.

It's essential that people see for their own eyes that anti-GLBT ignorance still exists out there. These postings were unbelievably tame and manageable compared to rabidly anti-gay speech and literature etc. These two were only the tip of a very ugly iceberg. I could see nothing to be gained by removing them from view.

As for the retorts to the anti-gay comments, I thought that Will Roberts' postings in response (also deleted) were 'refulgent'. I have chosen that word intentionally, not because it is one of my very favourite words (which it is), and I never ever get to use it, but because the word itself can give the reader an impression contrary to its true meaning if you don't check it closely.

For me, (with very very rare exceptions), there are far far greater risks and dangers in censorship of any kind, than exposure to hate, ignorance or untruths. Those who would censor speech, literature, and debate etc scare the bejeezus out of me. Like too many doctors, priests, and psychiatrists, censors always seem to think they know what's "best' for others.

I grew up at a time when 'love speech' for me and my kind, for my people, was condemned, banned, censored. Our 'love speech' was reviled and silenced wherever possible. The reactions of those with authority and power to the-love-which-dared-not-speak-it's-name was not much different from how 'hate speech' is dealt with now. Stifle it wherever and whenever possible. Snuff it out.

Where our 'love speech' did exist or surface it was often disguised (sometimes beyond recognition --- check out Shakespeare's sonnets) out of necessity. Secrecy was essential.

Although I find myself in disagreement with him, one of the two offending anti-gay posters on the homophobia blog, has some really worthwhile questions about how 'political correctness' may actually inhibit valid investigation and inquiry. Unfortunately censoring him would appear to strengthen his position.

Your essays are brilliant. They are informed, articulate, brave and courageous. You carry the flag for others unfailingly into battle. You are an amazing advocate. I have such admiration and respect for you, but on this issue we must disagree.

Bob