Fun Stuff > CHATTER

Bill C-10, Canadian censorship.

<< < (4/6) > >>

Uber Ritter:

--- Quote from: KharBevNor on 04 Mar 2008, 17:58 ---
Fun fact! That's still not actually a law. There's a version of it tacked on to another bill that's still in Lords Committees.

I find the idea ridiculous and dangerous. Censoring the production of material which, at the end of the day, harms absolutely no-one, is bad enough, but criminalising the very possession?

--- End quote ---
Ah, I didn't know that.  Shows me up for being an American, I guess.  That's good to hear, at least.

valley_parade:

--- Quote from: KharBevNor on 04 Mar 2008, 17:58 ---still in Lords Committees

--- End quote ---

read: Lords are just sitting around watching porn all day.

negative creep:
Oh man, I'm really sorry to hear that.

Mycroft:
My first post, probably not the best way to make an introduction, but the topic caught my eye.

I believe that the entire situation can be summed up as follows:

Refusal to fund does not equal censorship.

The term censorship has a specific meaning, and Bill C-10 does not fit that definition at all.

Boro_Bandito:
Edited: for immediately feeling like an inadequate response the moment I posted it.


You are a bit of a douchebag. There, that feels better.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version