Do You Have Anything to Declare? Yes. My Breasts. | The Stir

Remember the ill-fated Australian law demanding travelers Down Under declare "pornography"? Its enforcement proved so confusing that not only has the customs card been rephrased to read "illegal pornography," officials have been telling travelers who ask for clarification to declare: "anything explicit."

So, fearing they'd break the law otherwise, that's exactly what one newlywed couple did, showing their nude beach honeymoon pics in front of everyone in the customs line. Australian Sex Party leader Fiona Patten said that the law encourages "an incredible breach of people's privacy. […] If the objective is to stop child pornography then this is not going to achieve this." Like DRM, this law only punishes the law-abiding.

Read brief source…[kot-contrib]. (Thanks, maymay!)[/kot-contrib]

When Abortion Is Actually A Crime | RHRealityCheck.org

On the heels of an Australian decision that a couple were – in defiance of the facts – not guilty of breaking anti-abortion laws (because the laws are outdated and could be easily misinterpreted), Amanda Marcotte asks tough questions about the meaning of anti-choice legislation and its effect on women who become pregnant without being ready for motherhood: "What would happen to those women? Will anti-choicers, like cowardly Australian politicians, feel like it’s just fine for abortion to be going on as long at it’s officially condemned by the government and there’s a satisfying stream of women being sent to the emergency room because they inexpertly tried to self-abort? Or will they, like the cops in the Leach case, decide that it’s time to start sending women to jail for having the temerity to act as if they know their own situation in terms of readiness to be a mother better than strangers?" All good, hard, important questions. How will you answer them?

Read brief source…[kot-contrib]. (Thanks, KinkOnTap!)[/kot-contrib]

Angilcare flags withdrawal over gay adoption bill — ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Company)

With the decision handed down that names Proposition 8 unconstitutional, the U.S. has taken a step towards sensibility in how it treats the personal freedoms and rights of its citizens. Australia may be taking another such step; but not if Angilcare adoption agencies has anything to say about it.

Angilcare, one of only 3 non-government, accredited adoption services in the state of New South Wales, has threatened to withdraw its services if the state passes a bill that will allow same sex couples to adopt. Chief executive Peter Kell wrote a letter to state MPs outlining 11 reasons why the bill should be rejected, which apparently includes that "children need the opportunity to have both a mother and a father," and says that adoption is not a gay rights issue, but should concern only the interests of the child. Which I suppose has much more to do with good modeling for gender roles than with skill or ability in parenting.

Read brief source…