Comment Moderation: Is it Necessary?

Yes, for two reasons. I've had a number of outside websites post links that either go to porno sites (Chinese no less) or advertise products. Moderating comments eliminates that problem completely even if the spam guard doesn't.

The second reason for moderation is more important though. We live in a rude and crude culture filled with barbarians who use four letter words as staples and think insults are arguments. Here's an example. An anonymous woman has been commenting on my post about My Favorite Politician, Bob Marshall. I can't be sure that the comments all come from one person but I suspect they do. She began with a comment that I declined to post because it was an ad hominem attack on Bob laced with an obscenity. After that didn't appear, another more moderate comment was sent saying Bob considered handicapped babies God's "punishment" for pregnancy. I posted it, but demurred. So another comment came with the quote that she said was from Bob. But the quote seemed to me to be talking about the "punishment" that occurs as natural consequence of our actions. After all, if you drink a bottle of scotch should you be surprised by the hangover the next morning?

That brought back a one-line comment calling me an "f***ing idiot!"

Needless to say, I did not post it. So a day later a looooooong comment laced with obscenities appeared in my moderation box attacking Bob Marshal again, attacking me again and then going on to attack all Catholic priests as pedophiles, the Church as an evil misogynist organization that hates women, and ending with "Heil Mary." If a computer touchpad could foam at the mouth hers certainly did. I can't imagine she thought I'd post such a hateful screed and I didn't. However, I did stop and pray for her after I read it because all I could think was, "Wow! this is one angry, unhappy woman." When I described the comment to my husband he said, "I bet she had an abortion." I agree. It's hard to imagine that kind of fury from someone with no ax to grind.

But the good news is that a person who gets angry still has a living conscience. A person with a dead conscience just shrugs. Anger when the conscience is pricked  means the ability to feel guilt is still alive. And a person who has committed an evil act should feel guilty. (One of the most horrifying thing about the Nazi atrocities is that so many who committed them seemed to do so without a qualm of conscience. They were "just following orders.") Guilt is the first step to repentance and repentance brings forgiveness, reconciliation, healing, and joy.

So I try not to get upset by the anger of those who disagree with me about fundamental moral issues that involve sinful behavior like child-killing and lust. Their anger is the natural response of a guilty conscience, one that still has enough life to feel the sting of St. Michael's spear point. St. Paul invites us to pray for our enemies to heap burning coals of love on their heads. If they only realized that we are their true friends rather than the "f***ing" Christian idiots they label us.