Comment Policy

At SpokaneFAVS, part of our mission is to promote respectful dialogue surrounding issues of religion, spirituality and ethics in the Inland Northwest. Because these are sensitive subjects, they can be difficult to discuss and emotions can run high, obscuring the open communication necessary to further understanding.

What sets SpokaneFAVS apart is that it has become a platform – online and offline – for having these discussions in a meaningful and productive way. We welcome diverse views in our writers and commenters and support energetic, enthusiastic and passionate conversations that retain recognition of each other’s humanity.

In keeping with our mission, and to maintain this site as a community where such conversations can happen, SpokaneFAVS has a high standard for online dialogue. We expect our commenters to:

  • Be respectful.
  • Keep it clean.
  • Advance the discussion. Be relevant to the topic at hand.
  • Assume the best of others. Most people who participate with SpokaneFAVS do so because they are invested in increasing interfaith understanding; if you feel misunderstood or defensive, seek clarification first.
  • Ask questions. Search out answers.
  • Bottom line: treat others as you would like to be treated.

SpokaneFAVS does not allow:

  • Obscene, indecent, sexually explicit or offensive text, images or other material.
  • Defamatory, abusive, bullying, harassing, sexist, racist, hateful or violent speech.
  • Flaming (a pattern of personal attacks, name-calling, mocking or baiting).
  • Overposting. Don’t post identical comments on multiple stories or repetitive comments that don’t advance the conversation.
  • Ethnic slurs, religious intolerance, homophobia or personal attacks.
  • Spamming, junk mail, free advertising, commercial offers, etc.
  • Content that violates privacy or copyright laws. We welcome links to articles or websites relevant to the topic at hand.

Comments that violate these standards will be removed at the site administrator’s discretion. Users who disregard these standards will be reminded of the comment policy via the email address provided when commenting and repeated offenses will result in a ban from the discussion forum.

If you feel a comment does not meet these guidelines, please flag the comment as inappropriate (in the top right corner of the comment box) and a site administrator will review it.

The site administrators reserve the right to exercise their best judgment in enforcing this policy.


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pete Lineberger

Also please see opinion articles from the Washington Post by Michael Gerson. He was raised in an evangelical environment and still identifies with it. He also is one of those deeply disillusioned Republicans who never seem to be able to get heard by their own party these days. He decries the hijacking of the evangelical movement by that party and particularly by the current administration in the White House. The Spokesman-Review has published a few of his commentaries in the past several weeks and months.

Fred Eans

In regards to Andy Popes article about the beginning of life. He states the Bible does not state when life begins. In the exact words, He is correct. But the Bible was meant to be studied, not read. I do not know why the abortionists, and their defenders, do not give an exact reference that agrees with the entire word of God. In Luke, after Mary’s conception, she immediately made a trip to her cousin Elizabeth, who at that time was with child, in her 6th month, which would be born, John the Baptist. Mary would arrive within a week of her conception. Upon arrival, she was greeted by Elizabeth, without hesitation, that her fetus had jumped in her arrival, upon recognizing the presence of the Holy Spirit. There is no life, without a soul; here we have a six month and a three day fetus, both with souls, who has identities. What more is needed for proof, 2,000 years after the fact.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x