![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
afe66: I realise that we are all most likely adults here and I am fairly broad minded but will admit to finding the images and song titles disturbing and wonder to some degree why you have an interest in such things.
While we can chat here about personal freedoms, I wonder if you would be prepared to admit owning such items to parents, workmates colleagues.
Is your interest in such things that you are prepared to risk importing them and being found potentially be known to importing objectionable material.
What seems to be pushing boundaries when you are in your teens or twenties, may be regretted greatly when you are older.
As a father with a young daughter, if you were a friend of mine and I found such as cd at your house, I wouldn't be visiting again.
It maybe legal, but for me it too odd.
If you think such things are completely acceptable, are you prepared to tell us your real name rather than your Avatar.
Just my two cents.
A.
Epicwhale:
I suppose I have to do this for all CDs with this type of content that aren't already on the list? I thought it would be fine since music is considered 'art'.
This is going to get very expensive. :_:
Unfortunately this is not how NZ is.... however from my all of two seconds googling this, I noticed they appear to be an Australian band? What is their classification status over there? And is there something which might mean their Australian classification automatically becomes their NZ classification too?
Fred99:
I'm more shocked these days when kids from good atheist families take up bible class.
Fred99:
The taboo which should never be compromised relates to exploitation of individuals unable to consent. "Snuff" obviously falls in to that category, but that CD cover is just kids playing around with photoshop and fake blood from a costume/party store. It's pretty lame.
dman: What is their classification status over there?
And is there something which might mean their Australian classification automatically becomes their NZ classification too?
The original poster sounds younger than I thought as he asked his parents opinion which would make what's acceptable more restrictive.
I and a number of my friends have worked in jobs which require police checks and I'm very sure than a conviction for importing objectionable material would have excluded us from those jobs. Child care workers social workers teachers coaches (any job/hobby involving children or "at risk" people) nurses, physiotherapists, psychologists, doctors, dentists etc etc.
? Applying for a tourist VISA to the US.
A.
danielwd: So yeah, it's a question of defining objectionable material.
If I was that kid's parents I'd be asking some serious questions about what's motivating his interest in this garbage.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |