2008-12-03, 23:01 | Link #1163 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Singapore now, QLD next.
Age: 40
|
Sapporo to offer tastings of beer made with 'space' barley
Quote:
Last edited by kyon.haruhi.suzumiya; 2008-12-03 at 23:25. |
|
2008-12-04, 01:41 | Link #1164 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
|
Quote:
|
|
2008-12-04, 01:43 | Link #1165 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Singapore now, QLD next.
Age: 40
|
Quote:
For the record, I don't drink beer. |
|
2008-12-04, 17:19 | Link #1166 | |
Gregory House
IT Support
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2008-12-05, 13:32 | Link #1168 | |
Not Enough Sleep
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 48
|
Quote:
as for singapore and japan, their biggest problem is population decline. They need more childbirths not less. i am surprise they haven't outlaw condoms and birth control pills.
__________________
|
|
2008-12-05, 19:52 | Link #1169 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 42
|
Since there have been a lot of space news recently, here something for all teddy bear lovers, teddy-nauts.
|
2008-12-05, 20:10 | Link #1170 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: PMB Headquarters
|
Quote:
|
|
2008-12-08, 00:48 | Link #1173 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Age: 36
|
Australia: Simpsons sex cartoons are ¨child porn¨
A man charged over cartoons showing sex acts involving children modelled on The Simpsons characters has failed to have his child pornography convictions overturned.
In the NSW Supreme Court on Monday, Justice Michael Adams ruled a fictional cartoon character was a "person" within the meaning of the relevant state and Commonwealth laws. In February, Alan John McEwan was convicted in Parramatta Local Court of possessing child pornography and using his computer to access child pornography. "The alleged pornography comprised a series of cartoons depicting figures modelled on members of the television animated series The Simpsons," the judge said. The cartoons showed characters like Bart, Lisa and Maggie Simpson having sex. The man was convicted and fined $3,000 and placed on a good behaviour bond. "In my view, the magistrate was correct in determining that, in respect of both the Commonwealth and the NSW offences, the word 'person' included fictional or imaginary characters ...," the judge said. "... the mere fact that the figure depicted departed from a realistic representation in some respects of a human being did not mean that such a figure was not a 'person'." In dismissing the appeal, the judge ordered each party to pay its own legal costs as this was the first case dealing with this "difficult" issue. http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/...ld-porn-judge/ Further proof that laws against so called ¨virtual child pornography¨ will lead to nothing but insanity. |
2008-12-08, 01:22 | Link #1176 | |
Black Dragon
Graphic Designer
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the Netherrealm, thinking who to betray next...
|
Quote:
Why do I tell this? Simple, in other formu I had my email posted on my profile and some jerk send me those images (don't know if they were the sames) but they were quite disgusting and distrurbing, not only from the Simpsons, there were also some of Family guy, Futurama, Magical Godparents and some dysney movies, I swear, I couldn't sleep that night, plus I learned to do not show my email that easy on the forums The guys who made this kind of images are SICK
__________________
|
|
2008-12-08, 01:29 | Link #1178 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: East Cupcake
|
This is ludicrous. They assigned personhood to a fictional character? That was the prosecutor’s argument...and people accepted it? My god, what has the world come to? Added to that, these various underage figures (in the Simpsons, Futurama, etc) cannot actually even be classified as a fictional homo sapiens, due in large part to the fact that they are not, within their own worlds, of the species homo sapiens (when was the last human that you saw with 4 fingers and yellow skin?). So, there is no way that the argument even applies to the situation. Added to that, how far does this definition of 'personhood' as applied to a fictional character extend? Is it simply focused on the age, or can a fictional character now have other rights as well? Yes "... the mere fact that the figure depicted departed from a realistic representation in some respects of a human being" does mean that the figure is not a person, or is someone going to claim that a Powerpuff Girl is also human? I mean, the judge’s observation of this decision placed the role of a fictional character above even what America assigns an unborn fetus. How any judge or jury could accept the prosecutor’s arguments is absolutely baffling.
edit: Sorry if I came across as a little...forceful. I can't help but view this as a great miscarriage of justice. Last edited by james0246; 2008-12-08 at 01:39. |
Tags |
humor |
|
|