backtop


Print 39 comment(s) - last by ali123.. on Jun 16 at 4:49 AM


A new policy to include blocking software on all new computers is set to block access to gay community websites, and other areas of the internet expressing dissenting views or content viewed offensive by the ruling Communist Party. A Chinese lawyer has causen a stir, issuing a challenge to the government over the legislation.  (Source: BlogCDN)
Lawyer says people have the right to choose

"This administrative action lacks a legal basis.  Designating that the same software must be installed in all computers affects citizens' rights to choose," argues Li Fangping, a Beijing human rights advocate and Chinese lawyer.  He is causing a national stir by giving an official legal voice to challenges to the nation's firewall.

China has long blocked a variety of topics -- pornography, homosexual-themed websites (even those not of a pornographic nature), Tibetan movements, dissenting political views, and many news and media outlets that express opinions it does not like.  It is unique in that it has among the most internet users of any nation, yet it effectively has restricted what parts of the internet they can see.

Mr. Fangping, challenges the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology to provide a public review of their new government demand which calls for all new computers to have internet filtering software installed.  The policy is set to take effect on July 1.

The state media has carefully marketed the "Green Dam" filtering software as a nationwide effort to prevent children from being exposed to pornography.  Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang states, "If you have children or are expecting a child you could understand the concerns of the parents over unhealthy online content."

However, its critics say it goes much farther and is just one more example of endemic violations of human rights and freedoms.  States Mr. Fangping, "Above all, we're concerned about freedom of speech and the right to know.  We know that citizens have been prosecuted because of their private emails, and we're worried about more such cases."

Gay advocacy groups are particularly frustrated at the legislation.  In recent years, gay community websites have flourished in China. However, under the new policies, they would likely be blocked.  Wan Yanhai, a leader of the Beijing-based Aizhixing organization, which works on AIDS and gay rights, is fighting the new policy.  Wan states, "We need to demand not just the lifting of this software decree, but also an end to restrictions on gay publications.  This is about opposing censorship."

China's internet users currently number in the millions and market research firm Gartner predicts 42 million computers will be sold in the nation this year.

Mr. Fangping says that part of the problem in challenging the policy is that China's ruling Communist Party is especially sensitive to challenges this year, the twentieth anniversary of the 1989 pro-democracy protests which ended in a bloody crackdown.  However, he believe there's hope to stop the policy, stating, "How the government responds in the end will depend on the response from Chinese Internet-users.  If it's strong, they'll back down, and may let the plan quietly die."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

How long?
By eldardude on 6/11/2009 12:13:05 PM , Rating: 5
How long until said lawyer is dragged into a "protest" zone?




RE: How long?
By mmntech on 6/11/2009 12:41:03 PM , Rating: 5
Yep, I'm sure he'll suffer an unfortunate "accident" or "disappear" before long.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Any government that feels the need to censor its citizen thoughts and speech is illegitimate.


RE: How long?
By bhieb on 6/11/2009 1:31:43 PM , Rating: 1
And it is only a matter of time before such treachery is destroyed via revolution.


RE: How long?
By chick0n on 6/11/2009 3:02:37 PM , Rating: 3
better than some poor folks being drag into Guantanamo bay without a reason for years.

alright? stop talking about human rights already.


RE: How long?
By Kary on 6/11/2009 5:13:33 PM , Rating: 3
After reading
quote:
"If you have children or are expecting a child you could understand the concerns of the parents over unhealthy online content."
I was thinking the same thing

Didn't the US effectively just do this to newsgroups on the 'net? (the blocking, I mean)


RE: How long?
By chick0n on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
RE: How long?
By Nfarce on 6/11/2009 9:17:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Any government that feels the need to censor its citizen thoughts and speech is illegitimate.


And that puts those who want to shut down AM talk radio and even put the hate on Fox News where, exactly? For kicks let's just throw in all those hate comments the other day about putting a bullet in Rush Limbaugh's head just to "shut him up."


RE: How long?
By MozeeToby on 6/11/2009 1:44:58 PM , Rating: 2
It's a shame that today's heros of human rights don't have pictures and video to show their heroic acts. This guy is taking every bit as big a risk as 'Tank Man' did 20 years ago but a year from now no one will remember his actions. It's sad really.


RE: How long?
By scrapsma54 on 6/11/2009 1:56:59 PM , Rating: 2
Its kinda the same in america, its just that people don't get the recognition they deserve. 1st of all we have political parties that destroy what people so hard try to build. Its going to be a matter of time me or someone is going to find the right time to fight for true independence.


RE: How long?
By aegisofrime on 6/11/2009 2:29:36 PM , Rating: 4
You have to realize that it's a Confucian thing. Confucius is all about conformity, and as long as things are relatively ok, people have enough to eat, they are content and won't really push for things to be better. Economic stability is more important than Freedom of Speech.


RE: How long?
By scrapsma54 on 6/11/09, Rating: 0
RE: How long?
By Hieyeck on 6/12/2009 1:33:50 PM , Rating: 2
Bingo.

Americans seem to think that their culture should be the only culture and therefore forced onto the rest of the world. Everyone was talking about the oppresion of women in Mulsim cultures, but when they get there to "free them from the shackles", most of the women there had no clue what they were rambling on about.

Frankly, what's so bad about the other cultures? You keep rambling on about the freedom to choose, and they choose stability. The biggest problem with giving people the freedom to choose, is that human stupidity is infinite. Even Einstein wasn't sure if the universe could match that.


RE: How long?
By ali123 on 6/16/2009 4:49:37 AM , Rating: 2
100% AGREED


RE: How long?
By BZDTemp on 6/11/2009 6:52:12 PM , Rating: 1
It's the same thing 20 years ago as "Tank man" is remembered very few really remembers where those tanks were going!

We are talking the Chinese military killing something like 2500 and wounding upwards of 10,000 students protesting at a city square know a Tianaman square or, rather sad, the Gate of Heavenly Peace. The Chinese leaders was scared it could turn into a revolution so they came down hard on their people - what a nice place!


RE: How long?
By Chernobyl68 on 6/11/2009 6:40:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'll give the guy Kudos for having big Kahonas.


Think about it China
By DeanO on 6/11/2009 12:45:35 PM , Rating: 5
Why discourage the gay community when the country has such population issues that it had to implement its one-child policy? I know the politicians won't respond to reasoning about human rights, but perhaps they will to an appeal to pragmatism.

Note: Not to imply gay couples can't have children, or shouldn't. Just that far less of them do.




RE: Think about it China
By Pandamonium on 6/11/2009 1:11:10 PM , Rating: 2
How might a gay couple have (in the procreative sense) a child?


RE: Think about it China
By StevoLincolnite on 6/11/2009 1:25:43 PM , Rating: 1
A friend (or lesbian couple) has artificial insemination.
Then you have adoptions etc'.


RE: Think about it China
By MozeeToby on 6/11/2009 1:48:14 PM , Rating: 2
My wife's lesbian cousin is having a child with her partner. I'm not sure who the donor was but they will most certainly be the child's parents in every meaningful sense of the word.


RE: Think about it China
By Ammohunt on 6/11/09, Rating: -1
RE: Think about it China
By MozeeToby on 6/11/2009 5:00:37 PM , Rating: 5
Meh. As a kid who grew up in a single parent family, I, for one, rather have two loving parents than one.


RE: Think about it China
By Golgatha on 6/11/2009 4:00:52 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I'm not sure what beef the Chinese government has with homosexuality, since China has been an officially atheist and communist state since 1949.


RE: Think about it China
By PrinceGaz on 6/12/2009 10:44:48 AM , Rating: 2
+1. My thoughts exactly.


Children?
By Suntan on 6/11/2009 12:59:01 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang states, "If you have children or are expecting a child you could understand the concerns of the parents over unhealthy online content."


Didn't he mean to say, "If you have your one child ..."

-Suntan




RE: Children?
By GodisanAtheist on 6/11/2009 2:42:59 PM , Rating: 2
The old "think of the children" routine. Nice to see that as different as they are, our government and the Chinese government try to play their respective citizens all the same. Maybe they're not that different after all...

I offer a new platitude:
Think of the pornography, do something about the children!


herro China?
By vapore0n on 6/11/2009 12:15:03 PM , Rating: 3
Blocking sites, thats ghey




Usual high standards
By androticus on 6/11/2009 9:58:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
China's internet users currently number in the millions


"in the millions"??? lol 3 million? 750 million?

Nice to see articles here have a consistent journalistic quality. ;)




Now
By eddieroolz on 6/11/09, Rating: 0
forgive me
By tastyratz on 6/11/09, Rating: -1
RE: forgive me
By Golgatha on 6/11/2009 12:57:42 PM , Rating: 3
In November, 2003, the CDC stated that HIV infection
rates had risen in 29 states. There are an estimated
40,000 new HIV infections yearly with 70%
of these being among men. Of those men who are
infected, 60% are infected through homosexual
sex; 25% through IV drug abuse; and 15% through
heterosexual sex.

Just a random quote I found. AIDS is tied to homosexuality because there is a disproportionate about of HIV/AIDS cases, which are caused by only ~2% of the overall population. Personally, I think monogamous homosexuals with a clean bill of health ought to be able to donate blood.


RE: forgive me
By Iaiken on 6/11/2009 1:31:56 PM , Rating: 1
Do you think that might also have something to do with statistics showing that same sex couples are 80-90% (depends on the study) less likely to practice safe sex?

In now way do the CDC numbers suggest that men are at higher risk of contracting HIV from sex with a infected male than an infected female.

Regardless of sexual orientation everyone should practice safe sex with new partners and full discretion from both parties.

A little bit of honesty goes a long way.


RE: forgive me
By threepac3 on 6/11/2009 2:20:07 PM , Rating: 2
I think was his point...


RE: forgive me
By Golgatha on 6/11/2009 3:56:38 PM , Rating: 1
Well, those high numbers are caused by sexual promiscuity (lots of different partners over a lifetime) and by not practicing safe sex. My point was the association of a high risk for AIDS with homosexuality is a valid one.

However, IMO the FDA ban on homosexual donors should not be an overall ban. If a gay couple is in a civil union (or otherwise has legal proof of monogamy) and tests negative for all infectious diseases, then why not let them donate blood?

Even with solid scientific reasoning for it, I'm sure that the homosexual community would bitch about having to register and answer personal questions before giving blood, when heterosexual people would not in the scenario I just described.


RE: forgive me
By FITCamaro on 6/11/2009 1:59:58 PM , Rating: 5
The largest group with AIDs in America are gays. The next highest group with it is blacks. You can call it stereotypical all you want.


RE: forgive me
By matt0401 on 6/11/2009 2:17:52 PM , Rating: 1
It is. Haven't they already traced it back to simian species in Africa in the 50s? Think about it this way, if you introduce a disease that is primarily spread through sex into the homosexual community (which is where it was first exposed in North America) then where do you think it will be most prevalent? How many homosexuals do you know that have sex with the opposite sex thereby spreading it into the heterosexual community? Not many? I didn't think so. Sometimes peoples' lack of logic astonishes me!


RE: forgive me
By FITCamaro on 6/11/2009 3:51:46 PM , Rating: 1
You made no sense. You say its stereotypical (to me implying you believe it to be untrue), but then you defend my point that AIDS is largely a gay disease in North America. Unless I'm reading you wrong.


RE: forgive me
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/11/2009 8:55:02 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, you read it right, his post was self-contadictory.


RE: forgive me
By matt0401 on 6/12/2009 12:15:44 AM , Rating: 1
It's stereotypical to assume it was caused by the North American gay population, which it wasn't. Blaming the gay community for it is stupid. If the select few who were exposed to it way back when had been straight, then AIDS would be known as a primarily heterosexual disease by the ignorant.


RE: forgive me
By chick0n on 6/12/09, Rating: 0
"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh














botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki