I was asking exclusively about the detaining of children on christmas island. Or do we libertarians entertain the bigoted idea that liberty is for citizens and citizens only.
And i was asking why Australians are being fucked over by draconian laws that need a massive update?
They shouldn't be but: right to play a computer game? Slightly outweighed I think by the right of the most vulnerable in the world to seek asylum. Yet the only noises of dissent seem to be coming from that bastion of kindness Bob Brown and the elegant pen of David Marr.
Im not saying the arguments are the same on any level, just saying getting a straight answer from a Y/N question is impossible.
Go read up on the internet censorship in China and the proposed scheme here and tell me you don't see the similarities. Do you really think that it's a good idea for Australia to adopt the same methods that the Chinese government uses to suppress political dissent and freedom of expression to filter out a whole lot of content on the internet which have nothing to do with child porn?
But of course not, you dismissed homosexuality and euthanasia as absurdities. You only believe in your brand of "liberty" as long as it conforms to your religious views.
That's funny, you assume that I have as much free time as you do. I believe in a lot of things, but if I was cranking out angry letters to my local MPs about all the issues I feel passionate about I would be starving and living under a bridge. Not everyone has the luxury of time and a five hundred thousand dollars trust fund whilst going through college.
This is where you ultra-libertarians miss the point, watching high definition child rape footage is not an intrinsic 'freedom of ours', and the act of removing it does not violate any of our inalienable 'rights'.
You seem to be experienced, this could only be BoS' resident pedophile, ad_infinium.
You are completely ignoring the extent of Chinese censorship and the severity of the punishments which is the key difference.
I dismissed the suggestion that they would be censored content is absurd you dimwit.
Very weak.
They know about computers?
?Fair enough. But what makes you feel so assured that abuse of power won't be an issue?
Lemon, you seem to be continuing your support of the proposed filter despite clear, repeated explanations of:
Lemon is a Ad infinitum troll, just ignore the shemale and it will hopefully leave us alone, or the mods get off their fucking ass' and IP ban the cocksucker.They know about computers?
Fair enough. But what makes you feel so assured that abuse of power won't be an issue?
Lemon, you seem to be continuing your support of the proposed filter despite clear, repeated explanations of:Your view seems to be best summed up by this tongue-in-cheek comment from the above euthanasia article:
- The fact that child pornography often travels via methods not covered by the filter (e.g. P2P),
- How easy it is to quickly replace a blocked URL, and
- More efficient alternative uses of our national resources in combating child pornography, such as investing in the AFP.
Phillip Nitschke is trying to bypass the filter? He must be trying to download child pornography.Tell me I'm wrong and I might be more willing to listen to your ideas for beating off pedos.
Paul | Summer Hill - April 06, 2010, 2:38PM
Lol I wish.
It is confirmed.
