Commenting Policy

Commenting Policy July 19, 2013

by Calulu

We’ve never really spelled out any rules on people commenting on NLQ before but the majority of the posters have been respectful of each other, posted insightful words and even when disagreeing with the author or admin stuck to the issue instead of using it as an opportunity to bash any person. That’s how it should be in a civilized society.

Our two rules of commenting are –

  1. No personal attacks/name calling on authors or other commenters. Be respectful please. (Spelling this out out for the fundamentalist Christians that arrive a year or two late on the Duggar family postings and go ballistic. Don’t do that!)
  2. We will not allow conspiracy theories or drama from other sights to be discussed in comments. Which means if you’re here to try and drag NLQ into some online fight your comments will not be allowed to go through. The words “Razing Ruth” and/or “Free Jinger” are forbidden on NLQ.

If Pee Wee has this all online to try and speculate the whereabouts of his bike we wouldn’t allow it here.

We want to keep NLQ a drama-free zone where people feel free to discuss the ideas of leaving the entire QF lifestyle in a safe place. Safety for all. Happy posting! Thanks for taking the time to read this.


NLQ Recommended Reading …

Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment‘ by Janet Heimlich

Quivering Daughters‘ by Hillary McFarland

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement‘ by Kathryn Joyce


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • The_L1985

    Yikes! I hadn’t heard about that drama, but it’s sickening that any group would consider people who got out of a QF-style community to be “just as bad” as people who stayed in it. 🙁

    And that’s all I have to say about that. If people want to start drama, or discuss this issue with me further, it won’t be here. As you’ve said, NLQ is here for healing, not drama and Internet Fights. Nobody wins an Internet Fight–all parties involved just make themselves look stupid and petty. Good on you for nipping this one in the bud.

  • Drea

    Why would comments about a featured NLQ author be forbidden? I’m not trying to start trouble. I’m just utterly confused. I first learned about this said author from this site. So if the site endorses her, why can’t she be mentioned????

  • ginger1981

    This is a disappointing reaction. I found NLQ several years ago online and was sucked in by the “Story That Shall Not Be Named.” along with other tales of people overcoming their fundie backgrounds. I had admired NLQ’s goal of bringing the dangers of patriarchy to light, but you are doing a disservice to the movement by ignoring this issue. There is overwhelming evidence of “STSNBN” being a hoax, yet you continue to hunker down. I thought NLQ was about the truth? Instead, NLQ is endorsing a fundie-esque reaction by pretending it will go away. All you are doing is discrediting yourselves.

  • Suzanne Harper Titkemeyer

    We do not want that other group’s drama here. The last thing spiritual abuse survivors need is a witch hunt going on in their midst. Keeping this a safe place is a top priority.