Verizon's rationale: It has the right to prohibit services that "promote an agenda or distribute content that, in its discretion, may be seen as controversial or unsavory to any of our users."
Well, George W. Bush may be unsavory to me, and Hillary Clinton may be unsavory to you, but does that give your cell phone carrier the right to prohibit political speech or text it doesn't like over airwaves that you and I own?
Seeing a public relations disaster looming, Verizon backed off quickly and NARAL's messages went through to it's subscribers. But you can see where the notion of a non-neutral or proprietary network can lead - regardless of who owns it.
