Demi MooreFirst came multiple reports that pictures of women breastfeeding are being banned on Facebook. Now it seems beautiful pregnancy portraits aren't allowed either. What's up Mark Zuckerberg? Does Facebook have it out for motherhood?

From Demi Moore to Claudia Schiffer to Miranda Kerr, celebrities have graced magazine covers baring their glorious, pregnant bodies. But when mom-to-be Angela Hurst had similar pictures taken and posted them on Facebook, the site banned them. All her private parts were covered; they were tasteful; and she was thrilled to share them with her friends and family. Too bad said Facebook.

Hurst was shocked and told The Sun:

The picture was a bit of fun and not at all seedy -- all my 'bits' were covered. I had a lot of messages from people, particularly women, saying how much they loved it. It was something nice to remember my pregnancy by and was not sexual -- and if Demi Moore can do it, why can't I?

Facebook again issued its refrain, "Our rules prohibit nudity on the site." Okay, fine, but it's not nudity if all your parts are covered, right? I've seen plenty of racy, purposefully provocative pictures of women in lingerie and swimsuits on Facebook that they should be much more concerned about if they're going to be all puritanical.

And why do they need to be all puritanical anyway? I don't want to see any pregnancy porn in my newsfeed, but if I did, I have the power to defriend that person. As for children on the site being affected, well it's their parents' job to monitor their friends. If you don't want your children to see pics of a pregnant woman's bare belly, then don't let them be friends with someone who would post them.

Pregnancy and breastfeeding are two of the most beautiful experiences of a woman's life. Zuckerberg and his team need to acknowledge this or at least not act as if they're illicit activities or they're going to lose some of their most loyal users.

Do you think Facebook should ban nude maternity portraits?