As we moderate discussions on stories about hot-button issues on MLive, we frequently see the same violations of the community rules crop up repeatedly.

This tells me we need to do a better job communicating how the rules apply to these politicized discussions. Readers sometimes post questions on the Community Talk blog asking why comments on these topics were removed, and I answer them. But those exchanges quickly get buried as new questions are posted.

I'd like to surface and expand on those exchanges to give readers a better, more complete explanation of why we remove certain comments from certain types of stories. So I will be publishing a series of posts taking these hot button topics one by one, and detailing the typical violations we usually see with each, and why we consider such comments to be violations of the rules.

The topics are: Same-sex marriage, gun control, abortion, immigration, poverty and religion. Up first, since it's in the news today, is same-sex marriage.

In stories about same-sex marriage and gay rights, here are the violations we frequently see and our thoughts on them. It's important to first note that this is not a whimsical rule. We have discussed this topic at length as a staff and come to consensus regarding what we allow on stories about gay marriage.

1. Comparing homosexuality to illegal acts, such as pedophilia, incest, bestiality or polygamy. Homosexuality and homosexual acts are not illegal in this country, and there is a reason for this (see the landmark Supreme Court decision of 2003). The act of pedophilia itself, on the other hand, is illegal, as is the act of bestiality. Both of these acts have victims, so it is neither accurate nor fair to equate a legal act between two consenting adults with a crime.

But what about polygamy, which can also be an act between consenting adults? We posit that it's still not accurate to compare homosexuality and polygamy, as the latter is outlawed for a variety of reasons relating to the social and individual ramifications of such relationships, none of which apply to relationships between two consenting adults. An NPR piece is particularly insightful on this point.

2. Graphic descriptions of homosexual acts. Commenters who have moral objections to homosexuality sometimes try to gain support for their side by shocking others with over-the-top descriptions of sexual acts and practices. Unless what is being described is actually part of the story, it has no place in the comments. This type of comment derails the conversation and makes intelligent debate very difficult.

3. Slurs and personal attacks. We do not allow pejorative terms for homosexuals and homosexual acts, and we remove comments aimed at demeaning homosexuals. Likewise, demeaning religious people is against the rules. Calling people ignorant, stupid, etc. for their beliefs is out of bounds.

4. Religious damnation. Those who object to homosexuality on religious grounds are allowed to state their position as long as it's done respectfully. However, telling other people they are going to Hell is not conducive to constructive debate, and it's frankly off-topic. Let's stick to what's happening in the physical world.

5. Stating homosexuality is a disorder. Homosexuality was removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) in 1973. Therefore, it is not accurate or appropriate to suggest it is a mental disorder.

As we moderate discussions about same-sex marriage in the future, we will direct commenters to this post for questions, rather than to the general Community Talk blog. Next up, I will address the issue of abortion.

Jen Eyer is statewide community engagement director for MLive Media Group. Reach her at jeyer@mlive.com; follow on Twitter @jeneyer.