Anti Porn Bill....

[VanCityNewb]

Freezing the bank accounts of trucker protestors & people associated with trucker protestors.

Also i'm too lazy to look up the bills he is referring too but id assume one of them is the one were you cant view certain news outlets or stories on social media from a Canadian IP address.

How old are you? very curious.

Freezing bank accounts isn't censorship. And if you're engaging in illegal behavior, having your bank account frozen isn't illegal. It's very common for people who owe fees from court decisions, taxes that they've skipped out on, all the way up to drug dealers and others similarly engaged in illegal behavior.

I've not heard of any law where you're unable to view certain news sources. I've only heard about requiring companies like Facebook to compensate news companies when they're making their profits off of sharing those works, without any compensation. You're still fully able to view the articles though, just not on Facebook when they won't compensate the author of works that they're profiting from.

And I don't see any group of nonreligious people being responsible for any of these examples.

I'm 45.

 

[VanCityNewb]

wow, you just regurgitate whatever the government funded media tells you to say, good boy!!
protesting is illegal, got it!

you are a religious extremist.

That's the law, and has nothing to do with the media, lol. Protesting itself is not illegal, but just like with all rights, that doesn't give you the right to start trampling on other people's rights and endangering public safety.

It's funny, how the same people cheerleading first nations protestors being cleared out when they're blocking the streets, are suddenly outraged and incredulous when it happens to their antivaxxer conspiracy theorists. Lol. 🤦‍♂️

Anyways, this is all going pretty wildly off topic...

 

[Compton_]

That's the law, and has nothing to do with the media, lol. Protesting itself is not illegal, but just like with all rights, that doesn't give you the right to start trampling on other people's rights and endangering public safety.

It's funny, how the same people cheerleading first nations protestors being cleared out when they're blocking the streets, are suddenly outraged and incredulous when it happens to their antivaxxer conspiracy theorists. Lol. 🤦‍♂️

Anyways, this is all going pretty wildly off topic...

I dont care bro.
This is a stupid place to argue over this kind of stuff. and im too lazy to make a well research counter argument, especially when only 6 people are going to read this.

censorship is bad , we can all agree on that (I hope).

 

[stuntin]

Sorry, I still don't see what any of those have to do with censorship, or how any group of non-religious people are responsible for them. 🤷‍♂️

Someone doesn't understand what censorship means...

 

[VanCityNewb]

Someone doesn't understand what censorship means...

I've invited several people to explain what they mean then. But by all means, just lob baseless insults instead. 🙄

 

[stuntin]

I've invited several people to explain what they mean then. But by all means, just lob baseless insults instead. 🙄

I take back what I said above, its more likely we just have different definitions of "censorship".

Personally I don't care to get into it. It will just lead to things get political and theres no need for that here.

 

[dare.devil]

Sorry, I still don't see what any of those have to do with censorship, or how any group of non-religious people are responsible for them. 🤷‍♂️

Ok, let me help you understand.
1) First of all, I don't do personal insults until I receive the same first. I still didnt do any even though your first response on my sarcasm was "Are you high".
2) The post started with porn censorship bill, then the comments came as conservatives as religious assholes in response, so I assume liberals as non-religious ones.
3) You justified feezing accounts caused by illegal activity. Why this step was taken? To silence truckers' protest, I don't know why you don't see it as censorship. Additionally, let's assume if conservatives make porn illegal, then would you also justify freezing accounts of porn watchers as watching porn will become illegal activity?
4) Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act, which changes Canada's broadcasting policy and gives new powers to the country's broadcasting regulator, among many other things. That implies whatever you see online is scrutinized, i.e. called censorship.

You can do similar searches for C-10, then C-11, C-18, and C-63, C-27 for more information.

I hope it helps.

 

[susi]

@dare.devil so to be clear - i agree with you on the multitude of Bill being pushed through to censor what Canadians can see online...

My issue here is that this Bill will create a data base of your private identifying information connecting to your porn browsing habits....

this goes well beyond a "risk" to citizens privacy, this could destroy people's lives completely

you should have seen the Senators rubbing their hands together over the idea they would have information about what people look at in terms of porn...this will be used against us all no matter your sexual preferences....

I also wrote briefs and submissions to many of the other Bills as well and demanded the sex industry be included in any oversight committee/ advisory body etc under the Digital Citizen Initiative.

@compton - the reason we can't see all news is the actions of platforms - some like facebook have blocked Canadian news to punish the government for the Bills being described here.

The CRTC do no have the best track record for being impartial about content being accessible to Canadians especially adult content...

this will give the feminazi's power to do all kinds of things including for example blocking perb/merb/terb or removing it completely.... every sex worker in this country has an explicit image on-line...there are explicit images here....

My work of course has always been focused on our community and freedom of expression related to sexuality but I also may not agree with...but support the freedom of....people being able to engage in political life freely and the freedom to protest

love susie

 

[Moan For Me]

@dare.devil so to be clear - i agree with you on the multitude of Bill being pushed through to censor what Canadians can see online...

My issue here is that this Bill will create a data base of your private identifying information connecting to your porn browsing habits....

this goes well beyond a "risk" to citizens privacy, this could destroy people's lives completely

you should have seen the Senators rubbing their hands together over the idea they would have information about what people look at in terms of porn...this will be used against us all no matter your sexual preferences....

I also wrote briefs and submissions to many of the other Bills as well and demanded the sex industry be included in any oversight committee/ advisory body etc under the Digital Citizen Initiative.

@compton - the reason we can't see all news is the actions of platforms - some like facebook have blocked Canadian news to punish the government for the Bills being described here.

The CRTC do no have the best track record for being impartial about content being accessible to Canadians especially adult content...

this will give the feminazi's power to do all kinds of things including for example blocking perb/merb/terb or removing it completely.... every sex worker in this country has an explicit image on-line...there are explicit images here....

My work of course has always been focused on our community and freedom of expression related to sexuality but I also may not agree with...but support the freedom of....people being able to engage in political life freely and the freedom to protest

love susie

@dare.devil so to be clear - i agree with you on the multitude of Bill being pushed through to censor what Canadians can see online...

My issue here is that this Bill will create a data base of your private identifying information connecting to your porn browsing habits....

If you think the deep state isn’t already tracking our browser history you’re in for a shock. Why do algorithms work? Why do men over 40 keep seeing viagra adds? Leftists always try to add this shock and value like it’s some sort of mystery. Bill C-63 is more fundamental to any value we cherish than any anti-porn bill will ever have. The fact 2 minority governments could subvert democracy to form a coalition despite the populist vote going the other way is anti-democratic. The fact they are going against a set deadline for vote next year by a single week for the sole purpose of getting 80 MP’s a pension for life? And you’re scared of conservatives? LOL.

 

[westwoody]

The fact they are going against a set deadline for vote next year by a single week for the sole purpose of getting 80 MP’s a pension for life? And you’re scared of conservatives? LOL.

Conservatives always stick to their principles.

 

[Larry's Torch]

VPN! Suddenly I'm from Luxembourg.

 

[NatailiaNordstromm]

It's hilarious to me when people defend their political party as if the wealthy politicians aren't actually all on the same side. The real political party is Capitali$m. This is a easy-to-read version of the bill in question:

The bill would make it a criminal offence for an organization to make "sexually explicit material" (as defined by section 171.1(5) of the Criminal Code) available on the Internet to users under the age of 18 for commercial purposes.[5][1] There are three possible defenses for organizations accused of non-compliance with the law, including that:[5][1]

• The organization had a belief that the user was 18 or older as verified by a reliable age verification system.
• The material has "legitimate purpose related to science, medicine, education or the arts".
• The organization has received notice of non-compliance and implemented measures to prevent Internet users under 18 from accessing sexually explicit material.

The Governor in Council would be responsible for setting regulations relating to the bill's provisions, including determining the types of age verification systems that must be used, and appointing a minister or agency as the authority responsible for enforcing the law. When prescribing a reliable age verification system under the law, the Governor in Council must take into account whether the method complies with best practices for age verification, and protects users' privacy and personally identifiable information (PII), including whether PII is collected solely for age verification purposes, and data is destroyed once verification is completed.[5]

Fines are set at up to $250,000 for the first offence, and up to $500,000 for a subsequent offence.[5] If an organization does not employ compliance measures within 20 days of receiving notice of the offence, the appointed authority would have the power to request an order from the Federal Court for internet service providers to block all or part of the offending website, even if it does not consist solely of sexually explicit material.[5]

I agree with Suze that none of the mfs can be trusted so anything made a criminal offence can be manipulated so those in power with $$ can use it to control others. This said, I think it's too easy for kids to access porn. They have a pop-up window that asks if you are 18 or older, you click yes, and you can see anything legal in regards to porn. Kids are seeing things they shouldn't see. They're learning about the birds and the bees from watching bukkake and gangbangs, and that's fucked up. The innocence of childhood is being lost, and that's more important than easy access to porn, full stop. I fully believe sexuality should be unencumbered by law except when it comes to consent and protecting the vulnerable. Kids cannot be trusted to resist clicking the links and protection software only goes so far when they and every one of their friends has a smart phone. There needs to be a solution to protecting kids from seeing porn as easily as Pokémon. I can remember when porn had to be rented or bought outright and you had to show ID for age verification. The store didn't keep your info except for rentals and you could pay cash even. Why does everyone need immediate access to porn on their phone? It's not like it's going to back up and blind you if you have to wait a few hours. Or you could just use your

 

[VanCityNewb]

Ok, let me help you understand.
1) First of all, I don't do personal insults until I receive the same first. I still didnt do any even though your first response on my sarcasm was "Are you high".
2) The post started with porn censorship bill, then the comments came as conservatives as religious assholes in response, so I assume liberals as non-religious ones.
3) You justified feezing accounts caused by illegal activity. Why this step was taken? To silence truckers' protest, I don't know why you don't see it as censorship. Additionally, let's assume if conservatives make porn illegal, then would you also justify freezing accounts of porn watchers as watching porn will become illegal activity?
4) Bill C-11, the Online Streaming Act, which changes Canada's broadcasting policy and gives new powers to the country's broadcasting regulator, among many other things. That implies whatever you see online is scrutinized, i.e. called censorship.

You can do similar searches for C-10, then C-11, C-18, and C-63, C-27 for more information.

I hope it helps.

That was a lot of nonsense. You're allowed to protest, you can still go out and organize a protest, nobody is stopping you. But if you start shutting down freeways, roadways and disrupting commerce, your protest can and will be shut down. That doesn't mean that you can't protest, it just means that you can't infringe on other people's rights. A right to protest doesn't mean you can do anything and everything you want.

Scrutinizing things online isn't censorship. And so far as I know, that's just enforcing things that are already illegal, like child porn, etc.

Just rattling off random bills isn't making any kind of an actual point.

And, at least from my experience being American... Liberals tend to still have high levels of religious members. They just tend to not try and force it on others as much as conservatives do.

 

[Equity Market investor]

Oh great...here we go again. A thread topic leaning towards the left vs right comments . Seems like a regular pattern here lately. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what any of us here think or say. If it happens it happens. It's out of our hands on a large scale.

What I've noticed over time in other related types of topics in life? Things work out just fine inspite of what the " fear mongers" throw out at us. I think we'll be ok. And besides...someone out there will always find a way to convert.

 

[Larry's Torch]

Why don't you guys take your political stuff to the political thread instead of cluttering this one up and potentially getting yet another unrelated conversation locked?

 

[dare.devil]

That was a lot of nonsense. You're allowed to protest, you can still go out and organize a protest, nobody is stopping you. But if you start shutting down freeways, roadways and disrupting commerce, your protest can and will be shut down. That doesn't mean that you can't protest, it just means that you can't infringe on other people's rights. A right to protest doesn't mean you can do anything and everything you want.

Scrutinizing things online isn't censorship. And so far as I know, that's just enforcing things that are already illegal, like child porn, etc.

Just rattling off random bills isn't making any kind of an actual point.

And, at least from my experience being American... Liberals tend to still have high levels of religious members. They just tend to not try and force it on others as much as conservatives do.

Oh really, I haven't seen emergencies and freezing of accounts on serious corruption, anti-ISR protests and, worst, terrorist attacks. So you are saying protest non-sense was bigger than that, lol.

Dude, this post started with a random bill, and I literally gave a description of a bill and others related to it. That is why I mentioned them. Maybe making a point is your IP; please enlighten me also on how to make a point.

I don't think making any point will be a point for YOU, and your censorship is when it suits only you.

 

[white Ninja]

Just wait until if and when they get elected.
They'll be going after abortion and contraceptives, also.
Just like their MAGA/Evangelical brethren in the US.

Assholes.

The conservatives also wanted to Ban contraceptives, this is not a conspiracy theory .
Look it up !
There was a vote . It was close , something along the lines of 40% for , 60% against .
Too close .
Again , if you don’t believe me , look it up .
Madness , then again , nothing about this party surprises me anymore .

 

[susi]

There is a thing called condom or control to pull out before releasing (not considering 0.005% of accidents) which is very effective and doesnt require any contraceptive. But yeah we want do whatever we wish and everything has to be medically assisted.

ummm....condoms are brith control..? and would be banned? and HIV is still a thing?....never mind everything else? so...easy there "handmaids gentleman"...lol

 

[westwoody]

The conservatives also wanted to Ban contraceptives, this is not a conspiracy theory .

I was in Ireland in the 80s and condoms weee illegal. Virgin Records stores started selling them and it was very controversial.
Some US states are currently considering regulations as well.

 

[dare.devil]

ummm....condoms are brith control..? and would be banned? and HIV is still a thing?....never mind everything else? so...easy there "handmaids gentleman"...lol

I am sorry, stupid me. Somehow, I wrote my comment considering birth control medicines but not contraceptive devices.
I am a huge fan of condoms and wear them on my tongue, fingers and dick, all three places.

I never heard of banning condoms and IUDs.