We are only at the trial stage my arse. They have been so blatantly dishonest in handling the whole affair that any normal person can be forgiven for comparing the plan with China’s.
Notice that the minister never wants to appear on a show with someone who knows what they are talking about.
The interesting point about the statement that “parents can nominate sites to go on the blacklist” is that it implies that only parents can nominate which sites are to be blacklisted.
I wonder if this applies to unmarried parents or only married parents in a harmonious relationship.
Senator Conroy has spoken exclusively to The Age about how the flaws and anomalies in Victorian fertility legislation are putting barriers in the way of childless couples.
He said the law had not kept up with science and was failing to adequately protect children conceived through surrogacy.
“A number of changes that have been created by science have been ignored by the law, and that’s led to circumstances like my own, where I was forced to go interstate to have a child through surrogacy,” he said. “This caused increased stress, increased cost, and a whole range of legal complications.”
—————–
The Victorian-based couple went through the surrogacy procedure in Sydney, with the help of a separate surrogate and egg donor. A small number of Victorian couples have also travelled to Sydney and Canberra, where surrogacy is permitted. Senator Conroy’s sperm fertilised the donor’s eggs through IVF and the embryo was then implanted in the surrogate mother.
====================
In effect he didn’t like the laws in Victoria so moved to New South Wales where the procedures are legal and then went back to Victoria and (I believe had the laws changed to suit his situation).
Does the same principal hold with respect to the Internet ? If (for instance) I don’t approve of Senator Contory’s proposed censorship laws is my only option to move to a free country where viewing material that the Senator disapproves of is considered legal ?
I might add a point I’ve raised before.
It is legal in Australia to export X-rated films (legal in the Commonwealth of Australia) to Japan where they would be confiscated by customs as Japanese law does not permit the depiction of naked genitals. (Australian export regulations are based on the laws of the country of export not the country of importation).
It is legal in Japan to export mosaic censorsed films (legal in Japan) to Australia where they would be confiscated by customs as Australian law disapproves of depictions of candle wax and BDSM material (legal in Japan).
It reamins legal in New South Wales to purchase and view BDSM material (including “offensive fetishes” such as candle wax) even though Commonwealth Law prohibits it’s importation. It is also legal in New South Wales to download and view such material and I might add this right was fought for at the Cyberspace march of 1996 (see the YouTube nocensorshipaus channnel when (later accused and possibly convicted of a criminal offence) and former State Attorney General of New South Wales (Jeff Shaw) sought to criminalise the transmission (the upload, download and possession of any erotic material).
Note at this time Bob Carr’s government was considered ultra conservative. It was only later that Mr. Carr saw the folly of conservatism and endorsed the viewing and availability of the now banned film “Baise Moi”
Skip wrote:
“We in Europe respect basic human rights so no way other countries are doing this.”
Actually, other countries are doing this. The Cleanfeed list comes from the Internet Watch Foundation in the UK (http://www.iwf.org.uk/). New Zealand is also proceeding with a trial system based on the Swedish system. Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship for more information.
Doesn’t mean it’s right, but Europe cannot claim any moral superiority on this issue, sorry.
Eddie, I say that because he’s using less committed language. Compare that to his exchanges with the Green’s Senator where he is much more steadfast and absolute.
Somebody Think Of The Children is a blog about censorship and moral panic in Australia, with a focus on Internet censorship. It is edited by Michael Meloni.
8 comments
Sean the Blogonaut says:
Nov 28, 2008
Interesting the points he repeated:
wild claims
other countries are doing this
We are only at the trial stage my arse. They have been so blatantly dishonest in handling the whole affair that any normal person can be forgiven for comparing the plan with China’s.
Notice that the minister never wants to appear on a show with someone who knows what they are talking about.
Skip says:
Nov 30, 2008
We in Europe respect basic human rights so no way other countries are doing this.
Hammy says:
Dec 1, 2008
It sounds to me like he is backing down a little. Also good to hear that he has had a lot of people contact him to speak out against the proposal.
It’s important that we keep up the pressure!
Eddie says:
Dec 1, 2008
“It sounds to me like he is backing down a little”
Out of curiosity, what makes you say that?
I don’t get the impression Conjob’s backing down at all, especially after saying parents can nominate sites to go on the blacklist.
Bob Bain says:
Dec 1, 2008
The interesting point about the statement that “parents can nominate sites to go on the blacklist” is that it implies that only parents can nominate which sites are to be blacklisted.
I wonder if this applies to unmarried parents or only married parents in a harmonious relationship.
I guess Senator Conroy can claim to be a parent but this is only due to the fact he won a paternity battle.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2007/12/02/1196530480979.html
————
Senator Conroy has spoken exclusively to The Age about how the flaws and anomalies in Victorian fertility legislation are putting barriers in the way of childless couples.
He said the law had not kept up with science and was failing to adequately protect children conceived through surrogacy.
“A number of changes that have been created by science have been ignored by the law, and that’s led to circumstances like my own, where I was forced to go interstate to have a child through surrogacy,” he said. “This caused increased stress, increased cost, and a whole range of legal complications.”
—————–
The Victorian-based couple went through the surrogacy procedure in Sydney, with the help of a separate surrogate and egg donor. A small number of Victorian couples have also travelled to Sydney and Canberra, where surrogacy is permitted. Senator Conroy’s sperm fertilised the donor’s eggs through IVF and the embryo was then implanted in the surrogate mother.
====================
In effect he didn’t like the laws in Victoria so moved to New South Wales where the procedures are legal and then went back to Victoria and (I believe had the laws changed to suit his situation).
Does the same principal hold with respect to the Internet ? If (for instance) I don’t approve of Senator Contory’s proposed censorship laws is my only option to move to a free country where viewing material that the Senator disapproves of is considered legal ?
I might add a point I’ve raised before.
It is legal in Australia to export X-rated films (legal in the Commonwealth of Australia) to Japan where they would be confiscated by customs as Japanese law does not permit the depiction of naked genitals. (Australian export regulations are based on the laws of the country of export not the country of importation).
It is legal in Japan to export mosaic censorsed films (legal in Japan) to Australia where they would be confiscated by customs as Australian law disapproves of depictions of candle wax and BDSM material (legal in Japan).
It reamins legal in New South Wales to purchase and view BDSM material (including “offensive fetishes” such as candle wax) even though Commonwealth Law prohibits it’s importation. It is also legal in New South Wales to download and view such material and I might add this right was fought for at the Cyberspace march of 1996 (see the YouTube nocensorshipaus channnel when (later accused and possibly convicted of a criminal offence) and former State Attorney General of New South Wales (Jeff Shaw) sought to criminalise the transmission (the upload, download and possession of any erotic material).
refer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aejg0o0HiqQ
Fines of 25 thousand dollars for uploading or downloading erotic material were being proposed..
It would have been an offence “to transmit receive or possess sexually explicit information..” (about 42 seconds into the video clip)
“This video was recorded from Channel 9 news on the evening of May 27th 1996.”
refer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Shaw_(politician)
Note at this time Bob Carr’s government was considered ultra conservative. It was only later that Mr. Carr saw the folly of conservatism and endorsed the viewing and availability of the now banned film “Baise Moi”
Bob
Mark Harris says:
Dec 2, 2008
Skip wrote:
“We in Europe respect basic human rights so no way other countries are doing this.”
Actually, other countries are doing this. The Cleanfeed list comes from the Internet Watch Foundation in the UK (http://www.iwf.org.uk/). New Zealand is also proceeding with a trial system based on the Swedish system. Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship for more information.
Doesn’t mean it’s right, but Europe cannot claim any moral superiority on this issue, sorry.
Hammy says:
Dec 2, 2008
Eddie, I say that because he’s using less committed language. Compare that to his exchanges with the Green’s Senator where he is much more steadfast and absolute.
Eddie says:
Dec 2, 2008
“I say that because he’s using less committed language”
Good point. I didn’t pick up on that.