badgersprite said:
I also don't agree with censorship laws (the only exception being material which is in itself the commission of an actual crime - for example, child pornography). We don't need the government telling us what we can and can't see. Society can self-regulate. Material that is inappropriate for kids will not end up in a children's library, and major companies that own chains of bookstores will not want to be associated with material or ideologies people find offensive, because people can boycott them. Censorship just makes people more interested in what they're not allowed to have.
Whilst we agree, the reason for censorship stems from sheep minded individuals who without being told what it is they can and cannot see, will lobby an endless barrage of complaints should they deem something unfit. The government by principle cares not for censorship however they implicate it solely to rectify a potential hassle, specifically parents with an inability to parent their children properly. In spite of the stupidity, television, video games, music, everything will always hold the primary blame if a child does wrong instead of the parents; who should monitor their children and what it may be that they fancy.
Even with censorship there are frequent uproars when content is claimed to "cross the line" for lack of a better term; it would be a debacle if it was removed entirely, although I must admit, I would find it highly entertaining.
