Before I speak I'd just like to say thank you to Dr Owens for inviting me to speak. It is a great honour because it was after coming to a SFC conference three years ago that first inspired me to stand up, be counted and fight state and media hypocrisy and the new wave of laws against freedom.
I'm only going to briefly outline the history of the backlash campaign so we can move quickly on to questions. I'm sure there will be a few.
Last autumn, the Home Office began a consultation process on plans to strengthen the criminal law and make it illegal to look at selected extreme adult images.
The government concedes there is no evidence that images such as those on spoof necrophilia site, Necrobabes, or on BDSM chat sites like www.bondage.com are linked to or cause violence.
Nonetheless and even if no crime has been committed in making the image, the Home Office has suggested people should be imprisoned for up to three years for looking at pictures they think are abhorrent.
Simply for looking at a picture.
Backlash is the campaigning organisation bringing together individuals and activist groups to oppose any such legislation.
Since its inauguration, the group has encouraged people to particpate in the consultation process and advised people on how to lobby groups like Liberty and Justice as well as their MPs.
It also paid for the opinion of leading Human Rights lawyer Rabinder Singh who said the proposals as they stand would breach Human Rights law.
As a result of all the campaigning, the Home Office agreed to meet with a number of organisations to discuss concerns and has agreed that the original proposals may have been too far-reaching.
Nonetheless, the government is determined to push ahead with proposals that could see you threatened for looking at an "extreme" rock video, for receiving a text message of sex with a horse or for looking at vampiric or fetish magazines and websites.
You could even be prosecuted for looking at pictures you have taken of yourself in your own home.
The key point is that even if no-one was harmed, even if an image is legal to publish you could be breaking the law - if indeed it comes to pass.
And worst of all, you might not even know what you did wrong until its too late.
"It is likely that an individual will find it difficult to assess under the legislation whether he/she is committing a criminal act by viewing particular material. The effect of that uncertainty may be that the individual feels he/she cannot risk looking at any pornography at all, however mild." - Rabinder Singh QC.
This is already having what is know as a "chilling" effect. People are worried that images they look at now may be imprinted on their home PC's.
Following police action over the recent child porn laws people are also nervous about signing up to subscriber sites as they fear their credit card details will be handed over to the police.
"Although the law isn't passed yet, I wouldn't be surprised if the police weren't gathering internet logs and credit card transactions in anticipation of the bill going through," said one man who has stopped looking at 'erotic horror' in anticpation of any proposals.
"Even if they aren't yet, I would bet that it is the first thing they will do if the bill is successful."
The man - who wants to remain anonymous - said he had never considered the obviously fake images he prefers could lead to him being arrested, tried and possibly placed on the Sex Offenders register. But if these proposals become law that is exactly what could happen.
The Home Office will publish the results of the consulation sometime over the next few months. This will give some indication on how far-reaching the governemnt intends these proposals to be.

Questions

Why are the government so determined to press ahead with this law?

We don't know that they will. That is why we are campaigning so hard at this stage. But I think- in part - they saw this as an easy way to win public support. After all they were hardly expecting people to stand up for the rights of necrophiles and people who like looking at images of rape and bestiality.

Has the government got any proof? I thought I'd read research that said images help reduce violence.

The government said in the consulation that there is no evidence, But insists it wants to send a message to show that people who look at these images are not welcome in our society. You're right though the cases of Denmark and Japan suggest that easy access to this kind of porn may reduce rates of violence. In the UK, imagery of rape has become widely available after porn laws were liberalised, there has not been a massive increase inthe numbers of people out there raping and pillaging.