You argue strongly and passionately, Sarah. I am not sure Adele Horin is worth the effort, though. Its a bit like the battle between runner and then rest in these comments. Runners is stuck to his dogma rock like a barnacle to a rock, and you have to wonder what others hope to gain by attempting to dislodge him.

If you want to point your guns at a more worthy target, try this: Senator Stephen Conroy mandatory filtering proposal. You can read about in lots of places, here is one of his media, releases about it (and no, I didn't make a typo):

http://www.senatorconroy.com/meida108.html

What he is proposing is mandatory ISP filtering of web pages. Every ISP will be required to filter web content so that you can't see what the government censors deem inappropriate. It is "mandatory" in the sense that the filters will be on unless you put your name on a government managed list of "those who want to watch porn". This list is being marketed as a great way of tracking child abusers and other perverts.

I don't know how this works, but apparently when a politician wants to make something like this to happen he can fire up a publicity machine that writes articles like this:

http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,23021828-5013038,00.html

Rstuart “What he is proposing is mandatory ISP filtering of web pages. Every ISP will be required to filter web content so that you can't see what the government censors deem inappropriate. It is "mandatory" in the sense that the filters will be on unless you put your name on a government managed list of "those who want to watch porn". This list is being marketed as a great way of tracking child abusers and other perverts.”

I would agree with your criticism of any such scheme.

Anything where government requires the people it is supposed to serve to declare their personal private habits is morally offence and, without being dramatic, the thin end of a very big wedge.

In China the state has decided their population is not allowed to participate in certain religious devotions and not only bans viewing but imprisons the participants. With the introduction of a censorship tool and a list of “non-conformists to the social norms”, all it takes is a politicians signature and religious and political websites become similarly flagged.

I use the “VET” system. The comprehensive censorship component, which blocks out porn (can only be overridden by the administrator, only on a site-by-view basis) the VET system is suitable for parents seeking to regulate access for the children in their care, especially as the process extends to chat rooms and other venues of “risk”.

I did try it but found, for myself, the filtering interference was intolerable and inappropriate. So I have since disabled the filtering system as an option within the VET package. I would, however, keep it on a machine if it were being used by a child in my care for those who may be interested, I can recommend using VET it includes a lot more “protection” beyond its filtering attributes.

Since tools like VET are around, we do not need the state to tell us what we are allowed to watch and certainly not by declaring an interest, which some faceless bureaucrat then has secret access to.

The best comment on the issue I heard from a friend is "porn is like alcohol. Some is light and subtle some is cheap and coarse. too much is bad for you."

There are serious problems when a man wants sex every day while the wife wants it only once a month. Porn is seldom the root cause of the problem.

Unless someone can make a cogent argument against porn supported by real evidence of social damage, the case is weaker than the argument against alcohol.

The rejoinder "would you like you daughter doing it" is trite and the fall back when there is no real argument.

While porn is still not discussed in polite society, and there is a valid argument that some of it degrades women, the fact that women are using it to spice up their intimate relations, would indicate that it is becoming more mainstream.

It is never going to be eliminated, and the best that can be done is to regulate its excesses as has been done with alcohol. In the interim prudes like Adele Horin are f**ting against thunder.