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!"

23 of 717 comments (clear)

  1. Christian Fundamentalists Fuck Off by essence · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These people are fascists and need to be marginalized. They want to take away our freedoms. Fuck them.

    1. Re:Christian Fundamentalists Fuck Off by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fundamentalist atheists are just as bad. Only, it's not socially acceptable to show bigotry towards them, like it is to Christians.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Christian Fundamentalists Fuck Off by zaxios · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, stupidity is not a good response to stupidity.

    3. Re:Christian Fundamentalists Fuck Off by Gorm+the+DBA · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How could it have been "taken" from you when you NEVER HAD IT!?? More importantly, noone's preventing you from praying, silently, between just yourself and your god, as much and as often as you want. What I object to is your forcing *me* to listen to your moment of begging supplicational assistance from your diety of choice, or forcing me to make time to allow you to beg supplicational assistance, when I would rather be doing what I'm in school to do...ie learn. Want to have a Bible Study on school property after school, when I don't have to be around? Cool, have at, so long as the local Islamic folks can have a Koran study, the local Jews can have a Torah study, and the local Satanists can have a Black Bible (or whatever) study. Strangely enough, all the folks who claim "Freedom of Religion is being crushed" never seem to have any qualms about crushing *other* religions...just their own. And *that* is what those against Fundamentalism are protesting.

  2. Oh the Humanity! by thewldisntenuff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What about the children? WHO WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN?

    "Why is the Internet Industry allowed to avoid their responsibilities on this?"

    Why the hell aren't you watching your kids? What the hell ever happened to active parenting? If you don't want your kids to see such content then keep them off the damn internet,or at least monitor what they do online.....Furthermore, filtering may do more harm than good by keeping useful information blocked anyway............The "internet industry" is composed of a hell of a lot of people, and there is no one person to lay such responsibility on anyway.....The internet is not a cable tv show or a movie - it wasn't designed with a ratings system in mind.........

    I found it odd that they cite plenty of numbers on how often kids had accessed pornography, the survey simply stated -

    In November last year Dr Michael Flood of the Australia Institute cited a new study showing that concerns about pornography and children were warranted: "Children who regularly see violent pornography are more likely to be sexually aggressive and to believe that sexual abuse is normal".

    What study? What percentages? What numbers?

    Finally, From TFA -

    "This may have the result of putting cost pressures on some of the smaller ISPs, but there are arguably too many of these at the moment, and adequate competition could be maintained with 30 ISPs rather than the hundreds in existence now," it said.

    Screw the small guys, huh?

    (Sorry bout the long rant, can't sleep :) )

    -thewldisntenuff

    1. Re:Oh the Humanity! by Rebel_Princess · · Score: 5, Funny
      What about the children? WHO WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN?

      Their dad's closet, underneath shoeboxes of tax returns? The young miss section of the Sears catalog?
      Saved me in pre-internet days.

    2. Re:Oh the Humanity! by sgant · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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
    3. Re:Oh the Humanity! by Madcelt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I got to agree with you. As a parent, my child is my responsibility. I filter what she sees and I will continue to do so.
      Once she becomes an adult, she will be free to decide herself what she looks at. Where do you stop when you begin to censor things.
      I also find it amusing that those shouting that Christians are bigoted and trying to censor what they can see, are trying to censor the Christians (IANAC).
      Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If you want to look at porn, you can. If you want to bitch at people because they are looking at porn, you can. If you want to be part of a political party that tries to impose a tax to prevent minors from being exposed to porn, you can. It's your right as a human being to do those things, even if someone else finds them morally objectionable.
      Live with it....

      --

      I can only make one person a day happy. Today isn't your day.....tomorrow doesn't look good either!
  3. Reminds me of a bash quote: by agent+dero · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Male masturbation is a personal turn off for me. As a single woman, I'm especially looking for a man who doesn't masturbate, even while he's single."
    <factorial_nine> GOOD LUCK, BITCH.

    I think that it's applicable :)

    I know people..::cough:: that wouldn't use the internet if they couldn't get pr0n off it ;)
    ::cough::

    --
    Error 407 - No creative sig found
  4. I agree by essence · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fundamentalist anything is bad. I don't care what these people beleive, just so long as they don't force me to do anything.

  5. Translation by esapersona · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?

  6. What else is new? by Trailwalker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  7. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Austrailia is in the southern hemisphere, so if you're in the north looking south, it's the other way around, like toilet water.

  8. 'Fuck the children'. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As an Australian, I have one thing to say;

    Fuck the children.

    This is the job of the parents, and the blame for any problems due to lack of supervision lie squarely with them. I'm not paying a red cent for anyone elses irresponsibility.

    Thankfully, Fundies like this dont really have much of a say in politics down here, so hopefully this wont really be heard anywhere outside of /.

  9. Re:Huh? by bcg · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is generally considered that Labor is "left" in Australia whilst the coalition (liberal and national parties) are the "right".

    The family first party is clearly a right wing party and is identified locally as such.

    This party has been clearly shown to be essentially a front for the "Assemblies of God" church. See one of Australia's most popular political sites for an article on them

    They're right-wingers guys!

  10. If you need a hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'd be more than happy to help you off your cross.

    See here's the thing about your bogus framing of the debate. There has never been an example of an atheist (outside of a Stalinist country) demanding a plaque declaring "There is NO god." be hung in every school. No children have been asked to declare God dead as part of a loyalty oath, in a political effort for immoral politicians to attempt to appear moral.

    So give it a rest, Christ could use a day off from your imaginined persecution.

  11. Don't Fear the Neo-Christian Party by onosendai · · Score: 5, Informative

    #1 - Family First are a RIGHT-WING neo-christian fringe party, playing the percentages in the bible belt suburbs of the major cities ( cf http://www.hillsong.com/) - they'll poll +/-5% in those areas, not a real threat in the lower house, although they may get some sway if they get the balance of power in upper house, but I doubt it and
    #2 - they'll get this past on a cold day in hell, read their comments about smaller ISPs for instance (eg they're expendable - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/27/net_levy/) , it's anti-competitive, hard to maintain and largely ineffective.

    It's an attention seeking episode imho

    --
    <? include ('signature.inc'); ?>
  12. This plan blows by dnixon112 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Blows lots of money down the drain. 45 million for a system that will be easily circumvented by kids who are more tech savvy then their parents. If China, a nation dependant on controlling all media, can't stop people from getting around their internal content firewall, what do these christian wack jobs think 45 million dollars will get them?

  13. Exposure to pornography by Rockin'+Az · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Putting aside some of the strange assertions made about the practicality of ISP level censorship, the cost of such censorship and the impact it will have on small ISPs, the point that I find hardest to digest is the point about children's exposure to pornography.

    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

  14. Why is Christianity associated with conservatism? by zaxios · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Australia is a very secular country, so Christian parties are notable. Also notable is that they are conservative. This is something that consistently baffles me. The New Testament's doctrine is patently pacifistic and egalitarian (as opposed to that of the Old Testament, which was superseded by this). Neither of these are traits of conservatism as a political ideology. Christ didn't kill anyone in response to their wrongdoing. Christ didn't brand people as irrevocably and unequivocally evil, either; he said anyone could come to God. If you try to create a political ideology out of Christianity, its ideas are radically anti-establishment. That Christianity became associated with maintaining a repressive status quo (often brutally) all the way through history after Constantine is a travesty. It proves that if you mix Christianity with centres of power (be they states or churches), religion tends to be thoroughly misrepresented (scapegoated, typically). Basically, leaders who base their leadership on religion have either set out to misuse religion as a means of repressive enforcement or have been corrupted by a serious conflict of interest along the way. Christianity should not be politicized.

    Which brings us to the present day. You can disagree with my theology if you want, but flipping back to Genesis, wasn't the fundamental idea that God gave Adam and Eve freedom, freedom to do wrong and make errors, so that they would love Him for Him, not out of necessity? There were certainly consequences of wrongdoing, but the role of punisher was God's and God's only and fundamentally, humankind was given the freedom to choose (we chose poorly). Isn't it yet another misrepresentation of Christianity to associate it with repression? Not only is personal morality God's business, He has decided that it is wrong to stifle choice because it doesn't inspire true faith.

    Of course, Christianity holds that pornography is wrong. But to politicize its message has only ever messed it up.

  15. OK..not nuff said... by sgant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's the rest of George Carlin's rant about "protect the children":

    Today's kids are way too soft. : : : For one thing, there's too much emphasis on safety and safety equipment: childproof medicine bottles, fireproof pajamas, child restraints, car seats. And helmets! Bicycle, baseball, skateboard, scooter helmets. Kids have to wear helmets now for everything but jerking off. Grown-ups have taken all the fun out of being a kid. : : : What's happened is, these baby boomers, these soft, fruity baby boomers, have raised an entire generation of soft, fruity kids who aren't
    even allowed hazardous toys, for Chrissakes! What ever happened to natural selection? Survival of the fittest? The kid who swallows too many marbles doesn't grow up to have kids of his own. Simple stuff. Nature knows best!

    Another bunch of ignorant bullshit about your children: school uniforms. Bad theory! The idea that if kids wear uniforms to school, it helps keep order. Hey! Don't these schools do enough damage makin' all these children think
    alike? Now they're gonna get 'em to look alike, too? : : : And it's not even a new idea; I first saw it in old newsreels from the 1930s, but it was hard to understand, because the narration was in German! But the uniforms looked beautiful. And the children did everything they were told and never questioned authority. Gee, I wonder why someone would want to put our children in uniforms. Can't imagine.

    And one more item about children: this superstitous nonsense of blaming tobacco companies for kids who smoke. Listem! Kids don't smoke because a camel in sunglasses tells them to. They smoke for the same reasons adults do, because it's an enjoyable activity that relieves anxiety and depression.

    And you'd be anxious and depressed too if you had to put up with these pathetic, insecure, yuppie parents who enroll you in college before you've figured out which side of the playpen smells the worst and then fill you with Ritalin to get you in a mood they approve of, and drag you all over town in search of empty, meaningless structure: Little League, Cub Scouts, swimming, soccer, karate, piano, bagpipes, watercolors, witchcraft, glass blowing, and dildo practice. It's absurd. : : : They even have "play dates", for Christ sake! Playing is now done by appointment! But it's true. A lot of these striving, and parents are burning their kids out on structure. I think what every child needs and ought to have every day is two hours of daydreaming. Plain old daydreaming.

    Turn off the internet, the CD-ROMS, and the computer games and let them stare at a tree for a couple of hours. Every now and then they actually come up with one of their own ideas.

    You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone.


    Thanks George!

    --

    "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
  16. Small L liberals by mattjk · · Score: 5, Informative

    >It is generally considered that Labor is "left" in Australia whilst the coalition (liberal and national parties) are the "right".

    An important point here - the primary party of The Coalition is the Liberal Party, not the liberal party.

    The Liberal Party are *not* liberal in the true sense of the word - they are on the conservative end of the political spectrum.

    This has lead to Australians referring to "small L liberals" and "big L liberals", to differeiante between the two.

    > The family first party is clearly a right wing party and is identified locally as such.

    Yep, they're religious zealots of the worst kind. The only parties worse than them are One Nation and the Citizen's Electoral Council.

  17. Re:Militant, door to door atheists. by kalidasa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When dealing with the "evolution is a religiuos belief" idiots, it's important for you not to give them this kind of ground on their sophistic confusion of science and faith. There's an important distinction between religion, which deals with the non-falsifiable, and science, which deals with the falsifiable. Read some Popper.

    On the issue of evolution itself: the moment a Creationist asks for another antibiotic because they have a resistant bacterial infection, they are dealing with natural selection in real time. Disbelief in evolution won't save you from its effects.