“Research shows…” What research? What about Catharine Lumby’s Porn Report that shows most Australians are relaxed about porn and find it beneficial?

The pro-filter argument that filtering brings the net in line with Australia’s existing classification system needs to be better addressed.

My personal view is that Australia’s existing system of classification needs to be thoroughly overhauled to reflect the community standards of 21st century Australia: namely that Aussies like porn, that it doesn’t cause societal or personal harm and that consensual sexually explicit content should be legal to view no matter what media it comes in.

I would argue that, as it stands, the OFLC already tramples on our right to freedom of speech thanks to its ability to ban films by refusing classification. The classification system should be voluntary as it is in the US.

Essentially, it should not be up to the government or the OFLC to decide what I as an adult can view.

That should be the answer to the “bringing into line” argument – although I realise it may be considered a little too “out there” for some.

But if you think the current classification system is working, consider how the films of Tony Comstock were banned
http://www.comstockfilms.com/blog/tony/2007/09/24/our-decision-is-final/
http://www.comstockfilms.com/blog/tony/2006/09/08/an-open-letter-regarding-the-cancelled-queerdoc-screening-of-damon-and-hunter/
while other films like Destricted made it through because they were more “serious”.

Do we really think the people at the OFLC are representing society’s interests? What are they protecting us from?

We don’t need to bring the internet into line with current restrictions on freedom of speech because those restrictions in and of themselves should not exist in the first place.

Bishop Peter Ingham must be pretty confident that Catholic or Christian views will never be censored. I can’t decide if this is naive or sinister.

Now there is a group of men who know a lot about pedophilia and degradation of women.