Dear CNN.com

I submitted the following earlier this morning to CNN.com via their "contact us" form. Not sure if I'll get any response. 

     Are you guys seriously censoring comments with the word "sex" in an unaltered 

     spelling?

     I tried to post a comment an hour or more ago on this article:

     http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/03/03/illinois.sex.toy/index.html

     My comment was, in part, about the lack of use of the word "sex". The comment 

     hasn't posted yet, and I assume it won't.

     I really do get it if you want to preview posts to be sure they're not offensive or  

     off-topic, etc. But to not post the word "sex" in comments on an article about sex  

     is ridiculous. You seem to be willing to post "s*x"--which looks more like  

     "special effects"--and "$ex"--which I find disturbing, as it brings money into the 

     concept of sex.

     I haven't looked into this by scanning lots of article's comments, so I wonder is it,  

     in fact, your policy to not allow user comments that include the unaltered word  

     "sex"? If so, again, it's ridiculous. "Sex" is a perfectly reasonable word. It's even  

     used in the article I'm referring to.

     And if this is a policy of CNN.com, it seems to support the idea that sex is  

     something that ought not be openly and straight-forwardly discussed. If's that's  

     your position, then why even present such an article? Why not just ignore it, sweep 

     it under the rug, along with the word "sex"?

     (And another thing...)

     I've read your Terms of Use, wherein you state that you reserve the right to edit,  

     refuse to post, etc. Okay, if that's your policy, fine. But then don't say directly under 

     the user comment box that "Comments are not pre-screened before they post." and  

     then show a message that a moderator will have to approve comments. Just be  

     clear, one way or the other.

Now, maybe I'm wrong about the whole thing, and they just have a serious backup of comments. But I doubt it. 

Here is the comment I originally tried to post:

     Why can't people use the word sex instead of "s*x" or, much worse because it brings 

     money into the equation, "$ex". This is an article about sex.

     I once attended (not at school) an educational presentation of sexuality. It was  
     clear that it would be graphic, and no one forced me to go. It was a little odd,  
     but really informative. And providing information was the point. This incident at  
     Northwestern sounds very much the same: an optional after-class demonstration  
     which the students were warned several times would graphic. And it's for a  
     human sexuality class.

     If eating chocolate ice cream makes you uncomfortable, and someone offers you 

     chocolate ice cream, you should say, "No, thank you," and not eat it.