Today I felt so outraged about something that I've written to my federal MP about it.  He's a very busy and important person, so I doubt I'll hear back.

ISP filtering is something that does not protect the members of our society, it only serves to meet a political end.  It is one of the most objectionable aspects about the controlling dictatorships of China, Korea and Cuba (amongst other countries) and has no place in Australia.  If the government really is concerned about kids accessing porn, then there are other ways to do it.

I know the Christian Lobby has come out in support of it, which I think is a very dumb idea.  The fact of the matter is any laws that you can use to restrict alternative points of view, can be used against you.  ISP filtering could block Christian content as much as it block porn or the Anarchists Handbook.

I'd encourage you to write to your local MP and also Steven Conroy, the Minster for this issue.  If you do borrow anything from my letter, please change the words so they are said the way you would write (otherwise it will seem suspicous and be plagarism).

PO Box xxx

C------

Queensland 4xxx

29 October 2008

Kevin Rudd

Electorate Office

PO Box 476

Morningside

Queensland 4170

Dear Mr Rudd,

I want to write to you, as my local federal member, to let you know that I do not support ISP filtering and believe that the government needs to listen to the people and stop this initiative from proceeding.

Prior to the election, this was an issue raised during the ALP campaign, however the proposed form was to have the filtering to be optional.  I am disappointed to read in recent press that the government has no intention of making the filtering optional and there are also no clear statements of exactly what will be allowed and what will not.

The Federal Government has already run an extensive campaign aimed at making the internet safer for children, including offering net filters that parents can install on computers that children use.  This course of action has not proven to be unsuccessful and is the only course of action to continue with to ensure that all Australians are entitled to the freedom they deserve.

At present there is no guaranteed way to filter internet contents via ISPs that will not slow the speed of internet connections for all users, regardless of the content they access.  This means that filtering will mean that we have some of the worst internet access in the world.  In addition to punishing all users with slow internet, there is no assurance that the cost of filtering will not be passed back to users, meaning that access will become further out of the reach of low income earners and those in full time education such as university students who have very limited incomes.  It hardly seems reasonable for the government to take steps that will prevent Australians from receiving the best and broadest education possible.

The government has made no guarantees as to what content will and will not be filtered, and the experience of other countries that have filtered their internet has shown that some quite innocuous sites have been prohibited and those who want to access content that is illegal are still able to do so if they have the right skill set to bypass filtering.  All in all ISP filtering has never proven to meet it’s intended purpose.

Finally the purpose of ISP filtering is not to catch those engaged in illegal activity.  It seems that it is purely moral in intention.  Australia is a multi-cultural, pluralistic society.  There is a wide range of moral and ethical views that exist in the country and it is not the place of the government to enforce one view over the other.  Even if this is not the original intention of ISP filtering, it could very easily become that way.  Furthermore, many of the sites that have been touted as potentially being blocked – euthanasia or pro-anorexia sites – may actually be accessed for legitimate reasons and could also potentially lead to legitimate sites designed for informational purposes to be blocked.  Even if such sites are accessed for the wrong reasons, it is not illegal activity, it is only immoral, and it is not the place or even the right of the government to condone or maintain a moral point of view.  Additionally I wish to make the point that though I am a Christian, and I do not agree with people using the internet to access pornography, I do not think that I am in any way entitled to advocate taking away their right to access it.  The only exception for this is illegal material.

I am absolutely outraged that the government is not only considering, but making moves to go ahead with this plan.  I am also ashamed to see our country compared to societies that do not embrace freedom and respect for human rights and choice such as China, Iran and North Korea in this matter.  I love my country and I support it being a multicultural country that supports freedom and choice for every individual, so I ask that the government do the right and democratic thing and listen to the people on this issue.

Yours Sincerely,

Angela James