Porn Censorship in UK

I am beginning to lose more and more respect for countries in Europe. I just mentioned a free speech violation in the UK just a little over two weeks ago here. I thought Europe was supposed to be enlightened and progressive? Europe might have a higher average intelligence than US, and it is more secularized, but it is definitely not enlightened nor progressive. Hearing how UK censors speech it does not approve repulses me. Hearing how France bans articles of clothing they do not approve repulses me. Hearing how Sweden goes after Julian, not because of WikiLeaks, no no, it had nothing to do with that, it had to do with rape, of course, it had nothing to do with trying to end WikiLeaks, also repulses me. Well, maybe Canada is better to look up to as a role model.

But this story is a brand new low for the UK. I found out about this when I was writing my previous post on Net Neutrality. The UK is considering to ban porn on ISP's. Anyone who wants access to porn will be required to confirm that to his ISP. You can see the video of this story here.

Basically what this new law wants to do is to ban ISP content that carries people over to porn sites. They say it is "for the children". Supporters of this law also claim it "is not a violation of free speech" and that it "is not censorship" because people can see porn provided they get permission to look at porn from the ISP that is under control by the government.

In my past post I wrote about various questions related to net neutrality here. One of my objections was that this gives government access to control the internet. Once they gain that it is just a matter of time that they will censor various information online. I justified myself why I am not walking on a slippery-slope when I make this statement, but this new report about porn suppression in UK confirms what I said even more. The UK is way way more open to sex than the US; including gay sex. And they are much less religions than we are. So if the UK can consider such a ban than al fortiorti does not not make you worried that the same can happen in the US?

This law did not get passed yet. But the fact that it is considered and the fact that it can get passed is embarrassing enough. It is just like the mosque building near the WTC. If you noticed I never made any comment about it on my blog. Because for me the whole issue was so trivial it did not even deserve a post. This law is falls into the same category. The fact that it is being considered is embarrassing enough.

I do think that most people will find this law completely ridiculous and outrageous. So it will hopefully not get passed. But the embarrassment is still there. That it was proposed. For a brief moment it could have become the law. So embarrassing.

This law demonstrates the danger of government control over the internet. Once they got the control they need to do controlling. There can be no such thing as free internet speech when there is a serpent that at any instant can cut that speech. The UK government already controls certain internet content. For example, they have control over kiddie porn sites. Those have been blocked. Which is, as repulsive as it is to most people, still free speech. There is very good reason to believe that more information will be blocked in the UK. I am guessing that at one point or another the WestBoro Baptist Church website, GodHatesFags, will eventually be blocked in the UK since the WestBoro Baptist Church has been banned from entering the UK.
---

I want you to look at the video I send you. The blonde woman (who I want to silence by sticking my penis into her mouth) is clearly tyrannical. She demonstrates a phenomenon I have expounded on this blog before.

Step 1: She uses the "what about the children argument?!". This is a popular argument to be used by any statist. If you want to get a law passed then just remind your opponent that it is for the children. Now I personally do not care the children, they can go fuck themselves, or a priest can go fuck them. Besides, children seeing porn, oh no!, how scary.

Step 2: Propose the tyrannical law after you made the "what about the children?!" argument.

Step 3: Spout an endless amount of statistics. Just keep on saying statistics. Ignore all principles, ignore all reasoning, ignore any derivations that can be drawn from what you say, just throw more and more statistics at your opponent. Because statistics make you sound smart. Who cares what the statistics imply, who cares if they are really true, who cares if what you propose will really address the problem, just keep on throwing statistics to prevent anyone from responding to you.

Step 4: Claim that if this law will not be passed then terrible things will happen. Notice how she talks about child violence. As if that has anything to do with porn. But she just brings it up. Because child violence is an emotional statement to use. So if you say that this law is to prevent violence against children and to prevent molestation against children then you blow a danger way out of proportion. You use this approach as part of the scare tactics to convert people over to your side.

Step 5: Explain how your law is not tyrannical and not a violation of freedom of speech. Say how you are "a strong supporter of freedom and free speech". Just keep on saying how this everything you say is really freedom. This is another point I discussed many times before on this blog, that is, fascists never call themselves fascists.

When I was watching this blonde woman talk, who should rather be staring in a porn movie, in my head I made predictions about what she was going to say. I was dead on in my accuracy. At first I figured she will talk about the children. I was right about that. Then I guessed she will throw an endless amount of statistics. I was right about that. Then I guessed how she will talk about child violence just to gain some scare points if this law is not put into effect. And throughout this discussion I guessed that she would be reminding everybody how this law is not a suppression of free speech. I was right on every of my predictions. Not bad.