Government porn filter to slow down the internet

reply to post by Golack


Don't be so sure. The Constitution has been suspended since 1933.

I don't want to go into "party politics" but I will just say that history has a way of repeating itself. I don't like the way things are headed in America either. I think warrantless bag searches are on a par with restricting the internet.

Forgive me if this has already been said, I don't feel like reading 4 pages of posts.
If you don't want to see it, don't look at it. Does not matter what it is.

If you don't want your kids looking at it(whatever it is) install your own
safeguards. Its your job to protect them, guide them and instill the values that you see fit.

Do you people think the gov't can do that better than you?
Well of course they can if you let them.

Give them the pry bar to the door of ignorance, let them do the thinking for you.
And if you do that, this place will go away too.....its not good for the kids.

Well, if television in Australia is like that here in the USA, the envelope gets pushed further and further as to what is acceptable on stations like FX or Fox.

So, is this honestly an attempt to help the people of Australia? Or is this another bar in the jail house being erected under the name of "protection."

Stuff like this happened after 9-11 for our "protection."

Well, I was just thinking, companies like AOL sure do like to do the thinking for you when it comes to SPAM. I run a business, and AOL's system didn't like one of my links in my messages to my subscribers. So, all of my AOL subscribers got labeled as those with "complaints" about SPAM. And this includes my personal AOL address, which I use as a test e-mail. I didn't complain about SPAM from my own e-mails to myself? Yet, I some how was one of those who recieved SPAM. My subscribers most definitely "opted in." This is AOL "thinking for you." Heck, I remember signing up over and over for something, never to receive e-mails from what I subscribed to. The e-mails didn't even get to my SPAM folder. Perhaps I was using AOL's browser and that was the problem?

So, watch out, with any type of filter. What you do and do not want to see should be "selectable." Something of importance could get filtered out.

Big Brother has his foot in the door with this one. Will he use his new power to harm you?

Troy

Its a battle of morality and decency finally getting the upper hand in the world. You will all complain and throw a tantrum, but when its all said and done, we will just agree it was better this way.

I believe we need much more regulation of the internet, media, and businesses in general. And it is happening how wonderful.

Business in general should be strictly government regulated. Evil had a victory in the industrial age when Capitalism grew much too powerful to be appropriately regulated. But everything eventually hits a saturation point. We are hitting that point now in this century. Whole nations are being slaved and robbed so that we can get our "right to porn" deliverd straight to our cell phones and laptops.

Cultures are being erased so we can have shiny stones and metals to wear about our body. Flashy colors on our fabrics and pleasant frgrances upon our flesh. Then we rot our childrens brains as they wither spirtiually, mentally, and physically in front of screens at all hours of the day anywhere they go.

The days of reckoning are approaching. The abuses and overconsumpstion and degeneration of civility everyone has taken for granted will begin to dissapear once again. Only then may we as society have the right to call ourselves civilized once more.

[edit on 12/30/2007 by DYepes]

Who in the Australian government will ultimately decide what is pornographic and what isn't? What will the standard be?

Curtailing speech of any kind is a slippery slope. It may seem like a good idea to keep pornography away from children (at least I think it is), but what's to stop this "pornography police" from becoming too powerful in the future. Every few years, public interest groups will demand that more and more items be added to this list of "pornography to be filtered".

The government agency created to decide what is porn and what is not porn may one day become so powerful as to become moral thought police -- ones who may deem a picture of any pretty woman in a swimsuit as pornography, bacause of the way it may 'arouse' a boy going through puberty.

...But on the other hand, this agency may be fair and just in it's labeling of pornography, keeping in line with average public opinion as to what exactly the definition of "pornography" is. Maybe the government will filter only those items deemed to be pornographic by universally accepted standards.

Just as the former United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once said "[hard-core pornography] may be hard to define, but I know it when I see it"

[edit on 12/31/2007 by Soylent Green Is People]

Originally posted by seawolf197
reply to post by jpm1602

 

On topic: Do you have to be 18 down under to purchase porn over the counter? They regulate that here in the US.

Does it make sense that the Government regulates over the counter, but not over the net?

Hey, Seaswolf the government does regulate it. If you look underage they will ask for ID, but those magazines come in sealed plastic bags that block all explicit content.

Good thing my brother works for my ISP keeps my anonymity safe

There is no way in the world this should be an "opt out" thing...

If I'm such a poor parent that I want the government to decide what is able to be accessed online from my computer, I should have to ask them to put the filter on...

On the other hand, someone like myself should not have to go thru the bother of contacting my ISP to ask them for a clean feed...

"Opt in" is the way to go for this thingo if they truly feel this must be done...

Personally I don't see why

[edit on 31-12-2007 by Rilence]

This is scary.

Call me crazy but I seem to remember that long ago we had this magic concept we referred to as "Personal Accountability". It went something like this, if you didn't want your kids doing something, like visiting a pornographic website, you would apply your own parental filters and monitor your child's internet usage through any number of computer monitoring programs.

I also remember there was something called "Democratic Governmental Responsibility" where in the government would try it's hardest to work towards the betterment of the country and stay out of the citizen's lives leaving them to make their own decisions and their own mistakes.

Oh yeah, there also used to be this little thing called "Freedom" but no one really remembers that/

If parents are worried about what children access on the internet, then it is entirely their responsibility to monitor their internet use - either by supervising them, using good software parental controls and most of all, not having a PC in the kids bedroom where they can access the net any time they like.

Of course, that's way too much work for lazy parents, they'd much rather just let Big Brother take care of it all for them, then they can shift the blame onto someone else when their little angels are off downloading hardcore porn videos all night.

Originally posted by DYepes
Its a battle of morality and decency finally getting the upper hand in the world.

"Morality" and "decency" are subjective and not the responsibility of government.

What your post describes is called fascism. You want everyone and everything to answer to the State. I don't think so.



[edit on 31-12-2007 by apc]

i do believe pornography has to be more tightly controlled,the truth is its so easy to find porn on the internet.
i viewed alot of pornography in my adolescance and it had a detrimental affect upon my psyche.

i firmly believe that media does affect the mind,violence begots violence and so on

The government is paid by the people - it should only do what the people want.

About porn : I say put it on every TV channel, every news paper, every street sign, everywhere.
In one month people will get bored, and nobody would pay attention any more. It would be looked upon like it should be :a natural thing, nothing interesting

[edit on 31-12-2007 by pai mei]

Originally posted by grimreaper797
"enjoies explicit material".

Umm....what???

Originally posted by Burginthorn

To me at least, this should have been done the other way around. If your a concerned parent, then it should be YOUR responsibility to contact your ISP and have both Porn and Violent content filtered.

Ahh, but you speak of reason and personal responsibility. The federal government knows that Average Joe ins't capable of such — thus, it takes it in upon itself to dictate what you see and hear.

Surely the people are not capable of self-control?

reply to post by welivefortheson


Then you should call anad request the your ISP and cable be censored. It's a step toward personal responsibilty. Your government should not have to raise you, take care of you, protect you, feed and clothe you and shelter you all your life.

They should protect your freedoms ... not censor them. If you don't want to watch .... don't. Don't want it available? Call and have it restricted. But, don't let the govenment automatically restrict certain forms of information.

What's next? A certain political party?

This is a great idea. There is absolutely no excuse for child porn. I don't care what freedom you just lost. It's sick, twisted and perverted and the people that produce and push this crap should be rounded up and executed. This isn't a question of freedom of speech. It's a question of serious criminal behavior and the way you stop it is to charge AOL, NetZero and all the others $500 million dollars a day for every single child porn website and the problem goes away over night. If these internet companies can't police their own website and do the right thing then pull their license. Why is it taking so long to rid our society of this crap.

Originally posted by jpm1602
Pr0n is nasty. Way too many people get caught up in it. It excites the same brain receptors as coc aine. It is like a drug. I would avoid it like the plague. It is not good for the soul. Just my humble opinion.

This is an aside, but... I find it amazing that people attack pr0n and yet it's OK for the media/film whatever to be flooded with gratuitous violence to no end in sight! That's quite scary. According to the mores, it's OK to depict a wholesale slaughter of human beings in most horrendous ways, but lovemaking, however mechanical or simulated, its looked upon as something unbecoming. This is a hangover from dark days of Christianity or something. I just don't get it.

reply to post by Mutantalien1947


You're way off there, this isn't about that. This is about perfectly legal adult porno.

reply to post by Mutantalien1947


This has nothing to do with child porn.

reply to post by Mutantalien1947


What you speak of is called Fascism. When corporations lay down with governments. If you want to live in a Fascist country there are plenty to choose from. I suggest you get your VISA and start applying for citizenship.

Where did you get the idea this was about child pornography? I think we're all agreed that this form of media is unacceptable, but the means with which you suggest to rid the world of such is ludacris.