I would say that even if one poor little boy or girl is prevented from being sexually abused by the depraved minds that insist on their rights to use this junk as appetisers then the money is well spent.Amazing that those who insist on human rights could not care less about the damaging effect that results in our community because we treat teenagers and old boilers as sex objects. I would of thought the womens groups would have the sense to see the correlation. Their silence is deafening!

So runner, by your logic, we should ban cars which kill and maim people. We should also ban cigarettes and tobacco. Wait, lets ban everything. I am sure that every human activity has some risk to children.
What are we trying to do? Protect children from accessing porn or prevent molesters from accessing porn?
I agree that children need to be protected and the most effective method to do this is by good parenting. You cannot prevent those who wish to access porn with any current technology short of banning the internet.
This latest sop from John Howard is unworkable. There is just no way this will work.

" would say that even if one poor little boy or girl is prevented from being sexually abused by the depraved minds that insist on their rights to use this junk as appetisers " - yeah but the government insists on putting chaplains into schools. My son is exposed to that sick message in other places as well.

I've seen no sign that the filters will cut out myths about ancient middle eastern gods determined to cause unending suffering those who don't follow them. It's about time that we stopped kids being exposed to that stuff.

On the other hand some research suggests that teenage boys with access to porn may be less likely to become rapists. Maybe we could spend some of that money on reseach into how we can help better teenagers deal with sexuality in a non destructive manner.

R0bert

Not only because of the outrageous attempt to impose Chinese style censorship on Australians is this suggestion obscene. It is also outrageous that parents are not deemed capable enough to rear their children without government supervision. What are we good for? Just to breed?

Get your hands off my children. No government of any political flavour is to decide for me what my children will or will not see, read or hear. That is MY responsibility.

I am totally against the filtering the internet cause everyone now are fighting for the rights to information and this rules is trying to keep people away from this right.. Every age group has right to have information required for them. I think adult can have every information they want beside if it is illegal..

This is just another vote catcher, I have seen one of these filters you have to use your password for every page you open even ebay, it drives you nuts.
Will it filter killing I bet not.
I find killing more offensive than sex, as a friend of mine asks "Would you sooner be phuked or killed", me I go with the phuking.
Perhaps we should ban public toilets too, all that graffati.