Slashdot Mirror
Internet Censorship in Australia?
Enaku writes "Right wing Australian Christian political party Family First wants an annual levy of $7 to $10 on all internet users in Australia to fund a $45 million mandatory national internet filtering scheme aimed at blocking pornographic and offensive content at server level. (Read Family First's Policy Statement on Internet Pornography and Children (pdf) ) Great firewall of Australia, here we come!"
Am I the only one to think that there are two contradictions in that sentence? If not, Ausse politics has got to be a confusing system...
Hey Pharmboy, get it now?
From the article:
Family First admitted the cost of the filtering scheme could be prohibitive for small ISPs, but said the scheme should proceed regardless.
We wish to practice futility at the cost of other families' livelihood?
But seriously, is this possible? Is it even legal under current law?
A religous group wants force its delusions on the rest of the world by passing restrictive laws.
All in the name of family and children, of course.
One could argue that pornography is religion for the faithless. A picture of a person engaged in a sexual act is no more erotic than a book telling of the martyrdom of a quixotic rebel is holy
The significance of both are constructs in the mind of the viewer.. to the porn-seeker, the woman in the pic becomes a part-player in his imagination, to the believer, the suffering of Jesus becomes an atonement for our sins and his way becomes a path to enlightenment.
So a fit response to this would be to ban access to all religious sites.......
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
I grew up in the days before the Internet. Was I exposed to pornography? Yes. In fact most, if not all, of my contemporaries were exposed to pornography. Where did this pornography come from? Well believe it or not, there was a time when pornographic material came in these things called magazines. That's right - magazines!
What used to happen is that one kid would nick one of these magazines and bring it to school. Everyone else would borrow said magazines (the rest is left as an exercise for the reader).
The interesting point is where these magazines came from. Strangers on the streets? No. Mad pornographers trying to hook impressionable kids on their filthy wares? No. Evil devil worshippers and socialists trying to destroy the fabric of society? No. The magazines were nicked from - you guessed it - parents.
Teenagers and adults have always sought out erotic material. It was magazines in my day, the Internet today. Family First, nor any other right wing party, are not going to be changing that fact of life too soon.
One last thing - if you are Australian and interested in IT related policy issues (mandating open file formats, IT procurement policies, censorship etc) please consider voting for the Australian Democrats - if not for the House of Reps then the Senate. Yes they've taken a pounding, but they remain the only party in Australian politics that are dedicated to ensuring accountability in Government and the only party that has aggresively pursued IT policy. Yes some of the others are trying to jump on board the OSS bandwagon (Greens, ALP etc), however the only party to have looked at these issues seriously, and proposed legislation are the Democrats. When they go - so will an accountable Senate.
I come from a LAN down under
Where the packets flow and routers chunder
People often complain that Howard's new conservative brand of the Liberal Party is pulling this country as far right as the americans.
Well, he can't have been doing such a great job if the Family First party popped up. Ignore the submitter's insistance they're left wing - they're far from it. In fact, their main political rival is the Australian Greens, for their support of gay marriage.
The thought of equity in Australian society scares the shit out of these christian extremists. That's probably why they want to censor the internet now - god help us if a 15 year old sees some porn, it's going to unravel the very fabric of our "christian" society!
Really, and in fact, they could care less about "the children" and more about imposing their views on others.
But hey, lets take this even further, let's also demand everyone wear helmets everywhere they go...walking, biking, driving a car...I mean, it only makes sense to wear helmets because you never know if you'll slip and hit your head...and of course you'll be better protected in a car accident! Let's push for mandatory helmets for everyone everywhere now! Remember Dr. Atkins? He'd be alive today if he were only wearing his helmet!
Give me a break...
George Carlin said it best:
Something else I'm getting tired of in this country is all this stupid talk
I have to listen to about children. That's all you hear about anymore, children: "Help the children, save the children, protect the children." You
know what I say? Fuck the children!
They're getting entirely too much attention. And I know what some of you are thinking: " Jesus, he's not going to attack children, is he?" Yes he is! He's going to attack children. And remember, this is Mr. Conductor talking; I know what I'm talking about.
And I also know that all you boring single dads and working moms, who think you're such fucking heros, aren't gonna like this, but somebody's gotta tell you for your own good: your children are overrated and overvalued, and you've turned them into little cult objects. You have a child fetish, and it's not healthy. And don't give me all that weak shit, "Well, I love my children." Fuck you! Everybody loves their children; it doesn't make you special. : : : John Wayne Gacy loved his children. Yes, he did. That's not what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is this constant, mindless yammering in the media, this neurotic fixation that suggests that somehow everything--everything--has to revolve around the lives of children. Ist's completely out of balance.
Listen, there are a couple of things about kids you have to remember. First of all, they're not all cute. In fact, if you look at 'em real close, most of them are rather unpleasant looking. And a lot of them don't smell too good either. The little ones in particular seem to have a kind of urine and sour-milk combination that I don't care for at all. Stay with me on this folks, the sooner you face it the better off your going to be.
Second, premise: not all chidren are smart and clever. Got that? Kids are like any other group of people: a few winners, a whole lot of losers! This country is filled with loser kids who simply...aren't...going anywhere! And there's nothing you can do about it, folks. Nothing! You can't save them all. You can't do it. You gotta let 'em go; you gotta cut 'em loose; you gotta stop over-protecting them, because your making 'em too soft.
Nuff said...
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Family First Party,
I was horrified to read in the news today details of your misguided
policy on instituting a Internet filtering system to block
pornographic and other offensive material on the Internet.
This policy is blatant pandering to lazy parents who wish others to
take the responsibility of properly supervising and raising their
children. I don't deny that pornographic material can be accessed on
the Internet, but having been an active Internet user for many years,
there have been only two occasions where I have accidentally
encountered advertisements for pornographic material. Hardly "easy to
stumble across".
Furthermore, I was flabbergasted at your easy dismissal of the burden
that would be faced by many smaller ISP's and that it doesn't matter
if you drive them out of business, because there "too many of these at
the moment". Never mind that this would negatively impact hundreds or
thousands of families (who I thought you were about putting "first"?).
It could perhaps be argued that Australia has too many political
parties, and that "competition could be maintained" with a lesser
number (like Family First, for example).
You quote figures that 73% of boys and 11% of girls have watched
X-Rated videos, but only 38% and 2% have deliberately sought out sites
on the Internet. So, according to these figures, MORE teenagers have
seen an X-rated video than have sought out Internet pornography.
Surely then your policy should be addressing the alarming numbers of
teenagers viewing these pornographic videos! Or then again, it's
quite possible that teenagers will view pornography any way they can.
You also note that poor uptake of end user filtering. Were there
reasons for this poor uptake? If it's lack of knowledge of the option
then you should perhaps be concentrating on educating the public to
use an existing system.
The policy also states we "acknowledge the need to regulate other
media". Regulation and censorship are two completely different things
- at least with regulation adults can still access legal pornography.
I dislike censorship; because you do not want "the" children to see
pornography does not make it right for you to restrict adults from
this. If parents do not want their children to access pornography,
they can take the appropriate steps. I do not believe it is the right
policy to inflict your censorship on everyone in Australia, whilst
increasing their tax burden (on those poor families again!)
If you are determined to provide an Internet without pornographic and
offensive material, an alternative, cheaper and far more preferable
solution would be for you to either set up, or arrange to set up, your
own ISP. Families would be free to use your ISP, knowing that their
Internet access it is filtered at ISP level, and the rest of us can
use the Internet free of your odious attempts at censorship.
Yours faithfully
Christianity will "get off its cross" when the world stops putting it back up there.
Whatever.
Nobody but yourself is putting you on a cross.
So they started calling what some people called "Christmas vacation" "Winter Vacation".
Big fucking deal.
In the first place, it was called "Winter Solstice" long before Christianity coopted it.
In the second place, it has not a god damned thing to do with your religion because all the evidence points to Jesus (if he ever existed which there is very little evidence for) being born in the summer.
So get off your pity potty because what you stole was given back to everybody.
Tough shit you whiny little bitch.
Further, why should we force the many good Americans who don't buy into your religion to put up with having your particular world view shoved down our throats?
Given Christianity's brutal murderous history regarding anybody who doesn't agree exactly with whatever particular magalomaniac is in charge of the main local branch, how fucking psychotic would you have to be to think for one instant that shoving that in people's faces is in the least consistent with basic human decency?
So in conclusion, nobody gives a flying fuck what the particular details of your personal invisible friend are. Believe whatever the hell you want, but keep it to yourself and out of my face and I will return the favor.