Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Saudi Arabia Objects To Proposed .gay gTLD, Among Others

Posted by Soulskill on from the remind-to-register-the-.notsurprised-gtld dept.

Qedward writes "The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has objected to a variety of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) ranging from .porn and .sexy to .wine and .bar and .bible, according to records of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). The organisation said in June it had received 1930 applications for gTLD 'strings,' of which 911 came from North America and 675 from Europe. Saudi Arabia's Communication and Information Technology Commission, the IT and communications regulator, has objected to the .gay string and asked ICANN to refuse the application for the new gTLD. 'Many societies and cultures consider homosexuality to be contrary to their culture, morality or religion,' CITC said. 'The creation of a gTLD string which promotes homosexuality will be offensive to these societies and cultures,' it added."

7 of 459 comments (clear)

  1. Contrary to my morality by agm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I find religion contrary to my morality.

    1. Re:Contrary to my morality by chrb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My religion compels me to pray for you, and to let you be.

      Your religion doesn't compel any such thing - it is your personal internal sense of morality that guides you. If a proof were produced that your god did not exist, would you suddenly throw away all of your morality and principles, and turn to murdering, raping and thieving? Of course not. Millions of people have been killed in the name of the world's major religions, and many more have suffered persecution because of their religious beliefs. The "peace" that we have have now is more a product of the Western world turning towards secularism than anything else; it was only 70 years ago that some Christians were busy rounding up Jews - when the leader of the Eastern Orthodox Church actually said, "Why should we not get rid of these parasites [Jews] who suck Rumanian Christian blood? It is logical and holy to react against them.". Of course it would be unacceptable for a religious leader to say something like that today, wouldn't it? Hmmm... are we really so arrogant to believe that we have evolved so far, culturally and as a species, that such thoughts are no longer possible?

  2. How about this new gTLD? by killmenow · · Score: 5, Funny

    .fuckyousaudiarabia

  3. ... then don't go there? by MadCow42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm continually amazed that people think that because something offends THEM, that they have the right to censor what other people can do/see/say/hear/view/etc. There are a few things that the world DOES agree on - such as kiddie porn and murder being bad - but beyond that, if you're offended then simply censor YOURSELF and don't visit those sites! If the whole country agrees (which I doubt!), then block it in your country.

    If ICANN doesn't tell them to go take a flying leap, there should be rebellion.

    MadCow.

    --
    I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
  4. Re:Well I object by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Funny

    to their treatment of Jews and women, so they can kiss my ass.

    The Saudis probably wouldn't object to .jew because it would help them block a lot of material...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  5. Re:Well I object by X0563511 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, why would they object to .gay? They can block it for the same reason.

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  6. Re:Keep censoring and let the rest of the world go by Sir_Sri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Saudi view themselves as the leaders of the Islamic faith (sort of like if Italy took the lead on all things catholic that the pope said, good ideas or not).

    To them the notion that some of these concepts could even be considered acceptable, anywhere, is outrageous, and true moral leadership is to object vigorously to all of it. They know they'll probably lose, and they probably want to lose (and I'm sure the US embassy was consulted in advance as to whether or not they had any chance of actually getting their opinions followed). But as the stewards of the islamic faith they must at all times appear to object to things contrary to the brand of islam they are promoting.

    The idea that these behaviours (consumption of alcohol, sex for fun, homosexuality etc.) could be exposed to any of the islamic faith, especially their poorer brethren, who rely on the Kingdom for guidance and support on these issues, means they must show their leadership to the world and demand such unislamic activites be discouraged at all time. It would be equally terrible if a member of the Islamic faith outside of a Islamic society were to be corrupted by these ideas, especially as a young, impressionable boy or girl in the US or Europe, and the international community should at all times work to protect them from unislamic influences, everywhere.

    It's stupid, they know it's stupid, you know it's stupid, but the poor illiterate bastard in Bangladesh or Afghanistan or Morocco or the like can get outraged over it and they don't know it's theatre for their benefit, the saudi's can claim to be defenders of the islamic faith (which wins them points with the literate crazies) and it's unlikely to go very far anyway, so no harm done.