Australian Christian Lobby: Sex, Violence In R18+ Should Be 'No Different' To MA15+

R18+. It happened, finally. Back when I was editing Kotaku Australia full-time, I penned a number of pieces on the subject. In 2008, it seemed like such as uphill battle, so to see it become reality four years later is actually amazing to me. Now that it's here, the Australian Christian Lobby, one of R18+'s main opponents, reckons that the restrictions on sex and violence for R18+ should be the same as the current MA15+.

Speaking with The Age, ACL managing director Jim Wallace stated that for R18+ "to work", its limits on sex and violence would have to match that of the lower rating:

"I expect the new [R18+] classification to be described no differently to MA15+," said the managing director of the Australian Christian Lobby, Jim Wallace.

"If [R18+] is described in looser terms, or is less demanding than the existing MA15+ — which is already letting [in] things that shouldn't have been there — then it's not going to work. We already know that some of the games that are sold in Australia are unacceptable and should never have slipped in under the old rating."

Personally, I don't have an issue with a broader look at the ratings now that we have (well, will soon have) R18+. Heck, one of my arguments back in 2008 was that the inadequacies of MA15+ worked both ways. But the idea that the limits on sex and violence in R18+ should be the same as MA15+ defeats the purpose of the new rating.

Take for instance Left 4 Dead 2 and Soldier of Fortune: Payback, both of which were refused classification due to decapitaton and dismemberment. If the restrictions on violence stayed the same, even with R18+ these games would have been RC'd.

Fortunately, Ron Curry, head of the Interactive Games and Entertainment Association, does not share Wallace's opinion:

"We clearly wouldn't agree with that," he said. "There's no evidence to suggest ... that the content that currently sits there [at MA15+] should only be suitable for adults."

R18+ still has a little way to go and even when it is adopted by the states, I doubt it's an issue that will magically vanish. Games will still be able to be refused classification, though I can't imagine what would now land in that category...

Game on over sex and violence [The Age]


    When will Christians learn, the power they once had on the world is diminishing now that we know it's round and have invented science? These people are pathetic.

      I think the magic word in your comment is "learn". They are not trained to learn but to obey, hate and discriminate. Just like so many other redundant belief systems. Dont worry, every generation grows up with more access to the facts and we improve in our understanding which is a wonderful thing.

        not all christians are fundamental, please don't generalize.

          Just those in a representative poisition whose actions reflect the interests of the whole group.

          So basically all of them, because it's their fault that such a draconian duochebag was elected to make such comments.

            And your different from the extreme fundamentalists how? What with your ability to judge and label everyone with no evidence what so ever... you aad sad little person

              Well, Douriya isn't trying to subject 'everyone' to the moral standards held by a few.

              They're also not trying to decide what's best for Adults.

            Maybe you should read up on the ACL and get your facts straight?

            I'm a christian and a fervent gamer, I disagree wholeheartedly with what this guy is saying. Please don't generalise us, and if you had the smallest grasp of Christianity you would realise no single man represents the whole, ever heard of the reformation? Martin Luther?. Sigh. I could give you a history lesson on how religion/society works but you're clearly such an educated man of science that it would fall on your highly intellectual deaf ears...

              Don't like being lumped in with the idiot who is saying these things about games? Then make a bloody stand already and tell people that he doesn't represent the christian majority, because he's claiming he does. That is the issue, he is saying these games are morally wrong under christian values, and that good Christians ought to oppose them.

              Yes, it's wrong for us to act as if he is correct in this matter, and assume that he does indeed represent all those who he claims to. But until it is made clear to people that he doesn't in a public manner, then people will continue to make the incorrect assumption that he speaks for the whole.

                Perhaps that responsibility lies with the media?

              then where are the moderate Christian voices Eddard, why do you people let the hate filled puritanical fundamentalist hijack your message, why is there not a progressive Christian lobby group. It is not just this issue but also things like gay rights, women’s reproductive rights ect. The silence from the so-called moderate Christians is so deafening that it leads any reasonable person to think that either the moderates are such a minority in the religion that that they don’t truly represent what most Christians think or that underneath the moderates , although they may say otherwise, don’t really oppose what the fundamentalists say.

                well the last time there was a way to shut people up was back in the bad old days... Burning heretics at the stake is so passe in modern times!
                But in all seriousness, the real problem is that we're not allowed to take the word "christian" away from people. As a bible believing christian myself I find it extroadinarily frustrating to see both sides getting away with making us look bad. But there really isn't much we can do.
                A lot of people who call themselves christian are unfortunately missing the point. There will always be a market for anything that gives people an excuse to judge others and take percieved moral high ground.
                Trouble is that Jesus mentions this several times, in each gospel. In point of fact, Jesus talks about hypocrisy (paraphrase as making up bullshit standards to hold other people to) more often than sex, murder and hell COMBINED.

                So anytime you hear someone making judgements without mentioning the bible, put quotation marks around the word christian and ignore them until they go away.

                  The problem is they don't 'go away' they keep actively trying to screw up society for everyone else in the name of your precious book.

                  Actually what annoys me is people of any faith claming that so and so of thousands of years ago... said this and that...and he believed this and that........

                  Really? Did he? are you sure? --- who told you that? were you there? where did you read that? who wrote it and why? ; can you veryify that either? did you speak to him yourself? NO.

                  then what you should say is:

                  According to the bible Jesus MAY have said this and MAY have believed that..

                  But going around telling people with abslute certainty that he did actually say and do these things, while it is actually impossible to ever verify it yourself is complete lunacy.

                  So anyone coming out claming christian values in the name of Jesus in my opinion, is a moron.

                  and then forcing it down peoples throats and trying to build policy around it is even more moronic !!!


                perhaps most of the rational christians have moved on, leaving us with the vocal "minority". funny how the ACL think that the government shouldn't be held hostage to a "vocal minority" i.e. gay people

              "no single man represents the whole"? For starters, there's Jesus (who often gets forgotten by Christians in arguments over Bible-derived morality), then there's the Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury for Catholicism and the Church of England respectively. Official Church doctrines are set by the Heads of the Churches. Even if a particular Christian disagrees with their particular sect's teachings, they still identify as a member of that sect and therefore tacitly approve.

            Since when was Jim Wallace, or the ACL mind you, elected by any Christian populous?

            Looking over their site, I can't even find any mention of any Christian church officially supporting them. They've got an endorsement video that has what appears to be endorsements from 3 employees of churches but they seem to be speaking individually rather than as representatives and one even says "You don't have to agree with everything the ACL stands for.." so that wouldn't exactly count as a ringing endorsement.

            Except that's not how it works.

            The ACL as far as I understand it wasn't voted for by anyone. The difference is they are the major player. Which gives them a level of power they might not actually have.

            There is also the issue that people tend to be after things that actually affect them. While not giving two shits about anything else. For example if their was a lobby campaigning for Equal rights for same-sex marriage yet at the same time they were shouting down video games. The fact is that the core supporters who merely want Equal rights for same-sex marriage, probably don't care either way about video games but they want their Equal rights so the are willing to ignore any thing that isn't relevant to that push so long as those things wont compromise the push.

            Much in the same way most of the youth voted for Kevin Rudd because of the NBN. Most didn't care about his other shit. But the NBN sounded like a good thing that they wanted so he go their vote.

            I did not vote for the idiotic piece of shit! Everybody just assumes that all Christians are as judgmental as this idiot.

            Mild insanity is still insanity.

          Then tell the world, as a Christian, that the ACU does not represent you.


            Pretty much every Christian does say that. Search this site for the article by junglist on this.

          If there were more fundamental Christians than there wouldn't be so many "generalized" Christians. You know, those who have no idea what the fundamental tennets of thier faith are yet firmly say "Im a Christian!" when they know nothing about thier own faith except what you have been told which is but a fraction of what it really means to be a "Christian". So in reality it is you and many others like you who are generalizing, generalizing your own faith. Dont worry, I dont expect you to understand, but most if not every newborn in our generation is not growing up with that influence and that is a glorious future for us all.

          This comment has been deemed inappropriate and has been deleted.

          No they aren't, but they elect ones that are.

          Yeah, most Christians make up the rules they adhere to as they go along, to suit their own needs.

            Which negates thier status as "Christian". But you try to explain that to them.

          No the fundamentalist's act that way. And they exist in every group not just religion.

          Exactly. We don't all agree with the nugbag ACL group.

        This comment has been deemed inappropriate and has been deleted.

        It's rednecked, uneducated bigotry like this that really emphasizes how sh!te gaming culture is.

        Kotaku readers tend to lower the debate by a large margin. Not all, just most.

      "invented" science?

      Mmm, like the Aust Catholics Bishops Conference which was a huge backer of R18+, in the way it was intended to be?

        This comment has been deemed inappropriate and has been deleted.

          Aww it seems the truth has hurt a few too many Catholics. They're so butthurt they'll do anything to be relevant again.

            Funnily enough, as a Catholic who doesn't support the church's stance on many things like violent media and gay marriage, I agree a lot of it is power play and that they shouldn't have a right to do it.

            But as someone who didn't read the comment, I assume it was deleted because you were being immature and inflammatory, not because you made the Christians 'butthurt.'

            Be mature. Part of the reason the ACL holds so much ground is that they use people like you as an example of how games make people aggressive and immature. Don't give them any ammunition to use.

      When will non christians learn not to lump all christians in with extremists... you know Junglist is christian right?

      That's not true. We're not pathetic. Please don't just assume this, it's like judging Christians form Westboro.

      you're under the assumption that Christians don't believe in science? sure perhaps some theories do not go well with many Christians, but we study it, we apply it when necessary. Are you calling Christian scientists hypocrites? Don't generalise a group of people, I'm sure many people on this website sympathise with gamers generalised as fat lazy slobs, it's rude and unnecessary.
      small note: humans did not 'invent' science, we merely discovered it.
      some great scientists were/are Christians.

        Exactly - you apply it "when necessary" i.e. when the facts are so blindingly sound that your stories no longer have a leg to stand on.

        The bargaining the so-called "moderates" come up with are astounding.

        When is it necessary to apply science or not apply it? Not when it contradicts preconceived ideas about the nature of the cosmos? Should science be ignored if it challenges core beliefs in Christian morality?

          It's necessary NOT to apply science, when the most debated theory of the last three generations, has never been subject to true scientific method. The E word is thrown around as pure fact, simply because the majority of scientists "agree" it is. After studying Evolution for ... going on 10 years now... (far out you think I'd be convinced by now if it had a leg to stand on) I am yet to find any credibility beyond the assumptions, guesses and outright pissings into the wind contained therein.

          One of the major problems with this growing culture of people, who simply accept all science as fact, is that they don't realise themselves they're being told, they're obeying a law, the law of science. There is far too much faith being put into science that it has come to the point, whrere it no longer requires peer review for people to adopt it as fact. Peer reviewed science is extremely difficult to argue with and it can safely be considered fact, however 99% of people in forums wouldn't even know what peer reviewed science encompasses, yet they still believe it and then laugh at Christians.

          If you haven't read a peer reviewed theory then the chances are, you have just as much faith as Christians who haven't studied the Bible. If you have and you understand it, feel free to argue with Theologians and non WBC / ACL lunatics.

            Well said. The theory of evolution relies on new DNA code being introduced to a species but there still remains a single example of this occurring. There's endless examples of natural selection and even more cases of DNA code being reduced but there's no evidence for a species changing into another species. For this reason evolution remains an u proven theory.

            Enter the critics of religion. Most are people who's comprehension of science doesn't extend beyond operating a Bunsen burner in high school and who's comprehension of the bible is what they read on atheist Facebook groups. For most, their acceptance of science and their denial of religion is analogous to reviewing a movie without even seeing it. It's one thing to accept a point of view from a position of ignorance, for most part that describes my position, but it's completely dumb to ridicule another person from a point of ignorance.

            In other words, don't mock people based on scientific knowledge you yourself cannot personally understand. I'll let John Safran take over:

              I think the issue is the PERCEPTION of science, and its "followers", that Christians tend to have.

              Science isn't fact, and never claims to be. Science is the best answer we have with the evidence provided for the things that happen around us. Science is constant revision and addendum. It takes a truly confident (and foolish) man to claim, as the bible does, the set in stone facts and truths of the universe. The smarter one becomes the more they realise they do not know.

              You show a scientist the facts and tell him he's wrong, and he'll test your claims and, if necessary, completely trash the last 10 years of his work because you've made it irrelevant and incorrect. You do that to a christian, and the results are very different.

              There's a proverb, from the Bible no less, that says:

              "The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, But a wise man is he who listens to counsel."

              And another:

              "Reprove not a scorner, lest he hate thee: rebuke a wise man, and he will love thee."

              Science allows for this, The Church does not.

              And I say all this as someone who was educated for 12 years at private, catholic schools.

                Never heard of de novo mutations? Just because you don't know the word for new mutations doesn't mean they don't exist. The average person has around 50 de novo mutations, random changes in their DNA that they haven't inherited from their parents.

              You're an idiot. The process of evolution is one that takes place over such a long time scale that there is no one point that you can point to where one species changed to another. Its like a color gradient, they all blend into one another, but if you stand back and look at two individual points, you can see a clear difference.

              And there are examples of new DNA entering species all over the place. MRSA, swine flu, many other examples exist. You just don't like looking at them, because they don't fit your world view.

              we had millions of years to evolve 200ish years isnt going to be enough time to see any real change

        "sure perhaps some theories do not go well with many Christians" What exactly do you mean by "some theories"? Are you perhaps referring to evolution? Or maybe the Big Bang Theory? Christians tend to hate anything that proves their core beliefs false.

      Non Christians invented science? Wow.

      Get educated kid. Isaac Newton believed in God and opposed the church's view that the earth was flat. That was a long time ago, and I just finished reading an article written by a gay atheist who said that the world would suffer a great loss if religion was abolished.

      Life isn't so black and white son. There's a few loonies like the Australian Christian Lobby and Richard Dawkins who believe they have the monolpoly on truth and are bent on playing out the 'us vs them' angle, but the rest of the world lives in the grey area, the area we all have to share.

        I don't like that generalisation of Dawkins. Science doesn't have a will, he himself says this. He has also stated on many occasions that no scientist can completely disprove the existence of god.

        This comment has been deemed inappropriate and has been deleted.

          Sorry that was intended for "Shadow Artiste".

            "-Decide it no longer liked land and wanted to learn to swim.
            - Swim in water, for no reason whatsoever, just because it thought it should be.
            - Eventually learn to swim… at this point it’s worth imagining a cow spending it’s entire life learning to swim efficiently enough for the following to happen."

            Time to subscribe to a top quality peer reviewed scientific magazine XristoslsKing. Because it is clear you have absolutely no idea what your talking about.

              How very interesting... you use mockery in a statement that indicates a complete misunderstanding of mockery.

      Woah there. I'm Christian buddy but i DO NOT agree with the ACL. Dont misunderstand their bigotry and ignorance as Christian, they dont represent the majority.

    The title of this article should have read, "Australian Christian Lobby - still batshit crazy as ever."


      How they still manage to hold the title "Christian" on their party name is blasted farce. Even more so w/ the brilliant additions they added the craptastic NSW Work Reforms...

        They have Christian in the name because they are Christians ts just they follow more of the teachings than your average "I'm a Christian but I ignore half of the book my faith is founded on" Christians.

      I'm a Catholic, and I approve of this statement.

    And I'm sorry, why does this withered old idiot have any credibility in the laws the government decides on again? Why do the government even admit the existence of his opinions?

      Because the lobby represents many thousands of Australian voters who seem obsessed with this kind of thing. Don't ask me why ACL has any credibility. Every second article they post is a hateful slur on gay people. I didn't think organisations could operate like that in Australia and not go unchallenged, but apparently ACL has enough support to do it. It's not the case of a few whacked up fundamentalists having these opinions from their compounds. ACL has a very public presence and the active support from thousands of Christians who do actually believe this shit about gay people being an abomination and not worthy of recognition, or their responsibility to decide what we can and can not play on our own consoles. If it was just a handful of whack jobs, do you really think the ACL could wrap governments around its little finger? The ACL can turn its thousands of members in their thousands of churches against a political leader and they frequently court support from both parties at the same time. And on a personal note, I literally feel sick when I read some of the things they say about gay people. A part of my faith in humanity dies inside when I think about all the gay children who have these ACL members as parents. It's tragic that supposed Christian morality is turning Australians against each other.

    Not going to work, or not going to work for the ACL? There's a big difference, and this guy should not consider the viewpoints of one organisation to be the final word of everyone.

    After what religion did in the dark ages, they dont get a say

      Religion didn't do that, PEOPLE DID THAT.

        True but in the past 300 years (The age of enlightenment) technology and the understanding of the world has increased exponentially because of the larger focus on science and less focus on "Superstition".

        People with religion, did that.

    Somebody's obviously missing the point of R18+.

    I was wondering when this loser was going to surface again.

    Nice to see that the ACL is just as close minded and ignorant as usual. Frankly I was expecting some huge dummy spit about how society is now going to collapse under the weight of its own debortuary, with 10 year old kids running around and stabbing people because they saw it in GTA. Of all the responses they could have made, this is probably the most restrained.

    Either way, the ACB knows full well that making an R18 that's the same as MA15 is completely pointless and defeats the point of having a different rating in the first place, so I suspect that they'll take just as much notice of Mr. Save-The-Children-At-The-Expense-Of-Everyone-Else Wallace as we do.

    If it was another religious lobby group saying this it would be mainstream news and everyone condemining them. ACL you are not the moral compass of Australia please stop trying to enforce your morals onto me. Surley you have some other group of people to percecute than us gamers. (I am 40yo so I am not some kid spruking crap)

      Unfortunately the ACL seems to be the moral compass of Queensland currently. Hand firmly wedged up Newman and using him as a puppet.

    Ah Jim, the almost mindless Wallace to our Gromit.

    The main problem I see is no-one there has done any research. I have said this many times (so a google search should find my past posts) so I'll generalise: our rating system is in two layers but the ACL only looks at the rating (second layer) and never look at the code (the first layer).

    Incidentally, the ACL is suppose to represent Australian Christians. I wonder how they feel about how Jim Wallace behaves. Do they support him or are they as annoyed as everyone else is?

      I don't necessarily support him (as a Christian) but I do see what he's trying to do, which is in his mind a good thing. He isn't trying to rob people of their freedom of choice, rather I'm guessing he's trying to protect the many young men that can be negatively impacted by R-rated content.
      HOWEVER, you are exactly right in saying that there has been no research done (proper research anyway). Alot of Christian families with younger than 18y/o children would most likely be in support of the ACL, along with more religious or traditional sects of Chistianity (you could probably add extremists too.) The problem is, this content isn't about them, it's about a much different audience.

      My friends and I (all Christian) imported our copies of L4D2 from the UK, just so we could get the most gory versions. And if Jim Wallace was speaking for people like us, of which there are plenty more, he wouldn't have much to say.
      I will admit, though, I'm not too keen on R18+ sexual content in my games....just doesn't seem right.

        There shouldn't be any R18+ sexual content in your games because you will be able to read the label on the cover, and avoid the games that have such content.

        " Alot of Christian families with younger than 18y/o children would most likely be in support of the ACL, along with more religious or traditional sects of Chistianity"
        That's a lot of homophobes. Besides, your a minority; you don't get much of a say on the effect of the rating.

    People should stop reporting on this guy. As comedic as his statements are, all anyone is doing is giving him a louder voice for his rants.

    Why do people give organisations like the ACL and the ACCM a soapbox to yell their uninformed fearmongering from. . . We all know that as it gets closer to January 1, 2013 every newspaper and mornign show in the country is going to allow these jackasses on air to spew their bias fearmongering because everybody loves a good moral panic, and moral panics = rating. . . even if it is at the expense of everyone else. . .

    Also one more thing, The Age article also speaks with the vice-president of the Australian Council of Children and the Media who unsurprisingly shares a similar view to Wallace as well as making the old 'think of teh children' argument.

    I would be more open to at the very least acknowledging his arguments, if his organisations website hadn't been trying to sell me viagra for over the past year. . .

    I actually volunteer with a church that supported this and thinks the guys like this are misinformed.

    Where I am i've found no greater pro-gaming society than this church, hell they let us host our massive lan's there and even sponsor the whole thing.

    The only request they have ever asked of us was to involve as much of the community as possible and to please not swear of in the theme competitions avoid anything demonic (inside the actual church).

    Which is more than reasonable..... so I can honestly say these quacks don't represent Christianity as a whole.

    The sooner the power is taken away from these sensationalist [email protected] the better. How can MA15+ NOT be different to R18+? Is an R18+ movie the same as an MA15+ movie? I think (actually, I know) not. The whole point of having an R18 rating is to differentiate the higher impact adult content from the teenage oriented MA15+ content. The adult rating means it is for us ADULTS who want to be able to access this, and are able to objectively process what we are seeing. These religious wowsers need to wake up and realise that they are NOT the voice of everybody. If you don't like or want the content, just don't pick it up.

      Yep I want to TRULY rape and pillage that village

      with a side of dismemberment

      thats cool. Painkiller and doom well welcome.

      They are all for getting kids out doing something then having them join gangs or waste their life gaming at home.

      Its just a thing of not having anything that idolizes anything demonic in a church... which is fair enough.

        yeah when will they realise the church jesus deamons and satan kind of go together LOL

    Anything the ACL says on the subject is irrelevant. Nobody cares what they think. They're a group of batshit crazy Christians who want us to live under a theocracy. They continually pretend to represent what all Christians and Australians alike want, they really are so arrogant as to think it's a given. But in reality they represent nobody but their own tiny little group of fascist loony tunes.

    The R18+ legislation states "high" impact content will be permitted, which is currently not under the MA rating. So there you go, it's more liberal than the MA rating. What's Jimbo Wally Wanker going to say now? In reality nobody should even be giving them the time of the day - all they do is talk shit and back it up with the bible.

    Absolutely nothing they say has any sort of merit or logic . We're all adults and will decide for ourselves what's suitable, thanks Jimbo Wally Wallnut.

      " Nobody cares what they think."
      You don't say...

    Wait... Aren't they too busy worrying about same sex marriage to think about video games?

      Anything that contradicts their contradictory storybook, I think.

      Apparently they can multi-task. We are dooooomed!


      Apparently they can multi-task. We are doomed.

        Wrong comment replied to, ignore.

    They have an opinion?

    That's nice.

      Having read through the article in question and ALL the comments above, I'm not sure what's worse:
      > The fact that the ACL still thinks its opinion is relevant, or
      > The amount of general bashing of any catholic person with a viewpoint. This is why gamers are seen as assholes in the eyes of everyone else, people.

        We have the right to express our disgust with religious fundamentalism, especially when it tries to interfere with our secular society.

          No. Legally, you pretty much don't. You also have no understanding of the word fundamentalism. You're using it as a general pejorative, and it shows your lack of education and simple desire to hate other human beings, no matter how you have to justify it to yourself.

            Ah, "hate other human beings". Like homosexuals, right?

            Pot. Kettle. Black.

            "Just hope that as we remember servicemen and women today we remember the Australia they fought for – wasn't gay marriage and Islamic” -Jim Wallace
            Tolerance of Intolerance is an idiotic concept. I will call a spade a spade at the risk of offending your precious sensibilities.
            Jibes at my education level, which I may add you know nothing about only shows you to be a pathetic piece of crap Ben.

            @ Ben
            Far be it for me to start getting into overly personal confrontations with people I’ll never actually meet, just a point of interest without garnering a childish attack (if you were a highly educated person as you imply you would not find any need to make one) when you say ‘no you legally you pretty much don’t’, if you are implying ‘femto’ is committing a hate crime by simply stating he finds Mr Wallace’s religiously based comments disgusting you are incorrect. Unless they are threatening or defamatory - yes he pretty much can. And attempting to be a gramma nazi (which poor gramma wasn’t even used in this case) is getting tiresome in these forums, it’s an overly used form of insult that is employed poorly in most cases, including this one, and no Ben don’t bother make a follow up comment as I don’t plan to return here to see if you replied.
            NOW @ everyone else
            It is not the fact that Jim Wallace is religious that I find offensive, it’s his repeated exposure, it’s because if I was to talk on any matter in a public forum I would research it, come to a conclusion based on viewing both sides and deliver an argument that has relevancy to the subject matter. Jim Wallace doesn’t do any research which is painfully apparent when he speaks, he appears on television and just blunders his way through interviews and what is remarkable is that he is presented as the public face of the religious community when introduced on television.
            I don’t have to justify nor should ‘femto’ for making attacks on Jim Wallace because Jim Wallace openly lies and if he had it his way he would directly impose his will on others which should make him open for scrutiny. As for faith itself, similar principle in its application, if faith makes you happy then by all means, but the second you wish to impose yourself on another, especially when it’s not based on a practical reason but simply ‘because it says so’, then you open yourself to being insulted.

          but you aren't expressing disgust with religious fundamentalism, you are expressing disgust at anyone of even slight religious views about views that aren't even necessarily held by those people. Saying people who agree with the ACL are batshit crazy is not the same as saying Christians are batshit crazy. While the ACL may be made up of Chrisitans, Christian's aren't made up of ACL members. Same way not all Muslims are terrorists.

        > Wait, you meant the ACL's opinion was once relevant? O_o
        > No gamers aren't seen that way by everybody else, just by a small minority of religious people.

    Jim’s whole worldview is derived from Bronze Age mythology, he should never be consulted on any issue or given a platform which to speak from.
    It may interest some people that Gloria Jeans coffee had donated a large sum of money to the ACL. For more info follow this link:
    For more stories on religious fundamentalist trying to interfere in secular politics visit

    Religious arguments aside, what's the point of an R rating if the MA rating has the same content?

    This comment section is full of religious (yes, you are religious) anti-christian bigotry. Under Australian law, several of your are close to approaching a level at which you could be prosecuted.

      Shhh, don't tell all these amazing scientific wonderkids that. You'll pop their superiority bubble.

        I never knew the theory of knowledge and philosophy was a religion
        please enlighten me

        While inflating your own?

      Blasphemy is a victimless crime.
      Also if you admit people are fundamentalist, that means you agree that it's part of a continuum of opinion. To whit moderate religion gives fundamentalism a framework within which to exist.

      This comment has been deemed inappropriate and has been deleted.

      Oxford Dictionary definition of "Religion"
      "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods"

      How is that like athiesm?

    Dear Jim Wallace,

    While we're aware you don't represent all Christians, you're making the rest of the level-headed ones look bad. You're also a giant moron and need to go sit in a corner and read up on R18+ an d what it'll mean.

    Sincerely, The Gaming Community and the rest of Australia.

    There is no such thing as "content unsuitable for adults" unless it's deliberately committing a crime, such as Snuff Porn or something. Since games can't portray any of that, due to all interactive content being created by artists, then it should all be allowed.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now