Yes, that is my opinion. That said, I am certainly against censorship by default. I only say that "I" find a simulated rape with explicit sex barbaric, and that in "my" opinion things like that shouldn't be allowed in public places. Again: it is "my" opinion. As long as I do have a real option for not watching it, and provided than the people involved are adults and freely allows to take part, I do have no problems at all. Just, enjoy it if that suits you.

"Nobody has a "right" not to see something or be exposed to something that they can easily avoid by choosing not to partake of it." I cannot believe I'm reading this... So, seeing a bullfight should be compulsory, as well as executions, and I don't mean that you can voluntarily go and see the "show", I mean that, according to your reasoning, it should be a must. Where do you come from? North Korea? Besides, your analogy with coffee is nonsense. I'm not saying the Government should grant me the right to forbid anybody to see porn, I'm asking for the option that my ISP, to which I pay, to which I concede the right to filter my traffic, gives ME the technical means to effectively filter some content that I MYSELF don't want in MY home, for whatever the reason. I mean, as far as I'm concerned I'm happy with people filming porn (porn between adults, of course) and with people consuming as much as they want. But I do sincerely think that I fully deserve the right to effectively filter it from MY home, not yours nor anybody else's; a right you seem to negate in the aforementioned sentence.

And speaking of commercial filtering programs... come on!! Are you serious?? Is like Windows XP been virus resistant, don't make me laugh. But, anyway, I still don't see why is it so wrong to grant by law my right to ask my company to filter porn. After all, it is me, it is my right and it is me who pays may bill. So, why not? I insist: it is the right to OPTING OUT that should be enforced by law. As far as I'm concerned, porn can remain as it is.

No, you were saying some nonsenses about hats (yes, I got the metaphore, but still...). BTW, I don't see a simulated rape with explicit sex being something that should be allowed in public places. It is plain barbaric, just like when they hang people from cranes in Iran.

Well, it depends on your definition of dangerous. Not, definitely it won't give you cancer. And, if you first see porn as a formed adult, probably it won't be harmful at all. You may find some kind of porn more disgusting or attractive than other. But, believe it or not, pornography is really dangerous in many ways. But you don't have to trust me. Just do some (serious) research, some medical papers, some readings, both on line and in a library, and you will see than porn is far from being "just fun" for many people. People that, by the way, has the same rights as human beings than the rest of us.

I agree with you in that filtering porn should be up to the consumer. But I do think that the option to doing so should be granted by law. Or forced by the Administration, if you prefer these terms. The possibility of opting OUT of porn, you see, I'm not say that porn should be forbidden.

Well, I don't like stupid morons. And, I do have the right not to talk to them. So, why, for goodness sake, is it so bad that I have the right of opting out of porn? I'm not saying that it should be forbidden by any means.

Sure they are. As ill as diabetics, o people with lung cancer or coronary disease. And, although I see you think of them in pejorative terms, which you should be ashamed of, they really deserve the right to defend themselves and to cure themselves. Just like compulsive gamblers (online gambling is also devastating to many people) have the right to opt out from the casinos by signing a petition (at least, in my country). I don't know, but it seems that I'm no explaining my self right. After all, English is not my native tongue. I'm not saying "forbid porn", by any means. I just say that people should have the right to ask their company to filter porn, and that this right should be granted by law. I don't really see why this is harmful. Really, I don't see why.

Probably not. Aftear all I'm only a web developer.

I do absolutely agree with you. The right to opting out of porn should be compulsory. But not this way. This way establishes censorship by default, which, in the long term, it never is good at all. Regards.

In my opinion this move is both right and wrong. It is absolutely right because it gives, AT LAST, parents and people with real troubles caused by pornography (and, yes, pornography does cause really serious problems to a LOT of people) the ability to get rid of such a troublesome content. Think of alcohol and alcoholic people, or tobacco and smokers, just to mention legal substances, at least the addicts to them have the rightful choice of NOT having access to those substances imposed in their homes. Nobody delivers alcohol or tobacco daily, 24x7, and for FREE to them. Which is not the case with pornography. On the other hand, I think the move is wrong because it imposes censorship by default (which it would be right in public places, by the way). I do really think that granting the right for everybody to really OPT OUT of pornografy, if they so desire, should be compulsory. I mean, British Government should have left the access to porn as is (although I firmly disagree) BUT forcing the companies to grant the right to opt out of it, in a swift and easy manner. Regards.

Yes, or so I've been told. It seems that web programming is "not" the easiest way for new programmers. I've a colleague, Visual C# programmer, who says that "web programming is hell". Well, but I only had that chance and tried to do my best of it. Regards.

Obviously, I meant 24x7. Shifts and nights, you know...

Absolutely true! I've had to lern the basics to "survive". But I do not consider myself as a SQL expert by any means. Regards.

I wish I could!