thork you see the news?

I don't bloody think Sharia allows it!

Quote from: Nimp on July 22, 2013, 12:03:12 AM

I don't bloody think Sharia allows it!

Luckily, what you think doesn't matter.

Also, Cameron is terrible. How will I get my rape porn now?

Typical of this government. Do something which sounds good on paper but without actually looking at the evidence which suggests that violent porn does not increase violence against women but may actually reduce it.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061030/152445.shtml

I agree that videos showing real rape should be blocked and those who made it forced to bear the full weight of the law, but there isn't a compelling argument for cracking down on fictional violence. And why are we stopping at fictional sexual violence for that matter? Surely walking into an airport and gunning down hundreds is worse, and yet you can freely do that in Medal of Honour. Surely taking groups of people prisoner and subjecting them to the grossest torture you could imagine is worse, and yet none of the Saw films are illegal.

Yet another 'moral scare' which will run its course in a year or two, tops.

Quote from: Chris Spaghetti on July 22, 2013, 12:52:13 PM

Typical of this government. Do something which sounds good on paper but without actually looking at the evidence which suggests that violent porn does not increase violence against women but may actually reduce it.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061030/152445.shtml

I agree that videos showing real rape should be blocked and those who made it forced to bear the full weight of the law, but there isn't a compelling argument for cracking down on fictional violence. And why are we stopping at fictional sexual violence for that matter? Surely walking into an airport and gunning down hundreds is worse, and yet you can freely do that in Medal of Honour. Surely taking groups of people prisoner and subjecting them to the grossest torture you could imagine is worse, and yet none of the Saw films are illegal.

Yet another 'moral scare' which will run its course in a year or two, tops.

This is how a government takes freedoms. They need to get you to agree that censorship is required. So they use an example like rape which you obviously can't defend.

Then once that is banned they can start adding to it. Extreme political views, sites with engineering knowledge of gunpowder , bombs, etc. Sites with fundamental religious views. Sites that encourage criminal behaviour like hacking. Social media where extreme ideas might be exchanged. And so it goes on until you can only view what the government will allow you to see. they badly want the same control over the internet that they have over the media. And this is Cameron moving his pawn to e4.

However being as 25% of all web queries are for porn, its likely Cameron has absolutely no idea what he is getting himself into, and how unpopular this will be.

Move.

This is how a government takes freedoms. They need to get you to agree that censorship is required. So they use an example like rape which you obviously can't defend.

Then once that is banned they can start adding to it. Extreme political views, sites with engineering knowledge of gunpowder , bombs, etc. Sites with fundamental religious views. Sites that encourage criminal behaviour like hacking. Social media where extreme ideas might be exchanged. And so it goes on until you can only view what the government will allow you to see. they badly want the same control over the internet that they have over the media. And this is Cameron moving his pawn to e4.

However being as 25% of all web queries are for porn, its likely Cameron has absolutely no idea what he is getting himself into, and how unpopular this will be.

• The Tor Project
• Freenet
• I2P

Is it just me, or is Cameron your version of Bush, except less intelligent and more narcissistic?

There's no way a bill like this could pass Parliament. At the very least, 'Murica wouldn't allow it, because we love our freedom of speech more than we love our guns and when America says 'jump' England says 'How high?'.

1) Who, exactly, is qualified to be the legally enforced moral compass of a nation? A politician?

2) In 'Murica we love our freedoms, as said above. This infringes on the Brit's rights enormously, and that is unacceptable.

3) The government taking control of things like this sounds suspiciously like all of the bad parts of communism without any of the good parts.

4) My morality differs from those who would be enforcing this. Sex isn't a bad thing. It's awesome. Don't you dare tell me I should be ashamed of my body and desires barring those which hurt other people 

The more we as a society do, the less we will need government to do. We will have to tear down Labour’s big government bureaucracy — ripping up its time-wasting, money-draining, responsibility-sapping nonsense.

How likely is it that anyone will give a damn about that quote?