Linked from Theage.com.au:
An article about how the nasty Attorney-General's department seemed to call for submissions from people who had some experience on the subject. The Australian Christian Lobby, on discovering that their pro-censorship angle was outnumbered by lots-to-not-many on this issue, offered up this tidbit:
"The group warned against using the volume of responses on either side of the argument as a reflection of public attitudes"
Can someone remind me to bring this up in the next election? No matter who wins, we can point out that a majority of responses in favour of one party doesn't reflect public attitudes. I hardly think that democracy is concerned with representing the interests of a majority! How absurd!
I'll come back to this article when it isn't 1:30am. Goodnight all.