Okay, then I guess you won't mind answering a few questions I have.
Down to it, what is so fundamentally wrong with CP? There is no universal consensus of what is beautiful, what is ugly -- the human libido desires whatever it desires; black, white, brown, tall, fat, short, thin, male, female, etc. etc. Why is it a problem that one person prefers the flesh that of the youth? Centuries ago, the traditional relationship actually WAS between one person of considerably older age with one of a significantly younger age.
I anticipate the following responses:
1) Because it indirectly creates a demand for CP in general and it is thereby criminal.
2.1) Because it is immoral (religiously, culturally, etc.)
2.2) Because children aren't mature enough to decide for themselves, they should not be involved in CP and adults should not pursue relationships with them.
My responses:
1) Which is precisely why it should be made legal. I think it would expunge the market of concretely illegal media. This, in my thinking, is appropriately analogous to the drug situation. If drug X is legalized, the availability of a safer form of drug X would likely appear in market and the impure, dangerous forms of it would naturally cease to circulate (in ideal conditions). OBVIOUSLY I don't condone any physical violence toward anyone. One thing that I CANNOT wrap my head around is BSDM-related porn. And by God, if anyone harms their child, or any other's for that matter, get them some counseling. Pronto.
2) It is decided merely as such by the culture. I take it that the general populace on HN is of atheists -- why then, as atheists, would you shun the the preference of a certain type of body as unnatural, immoral, or illegal?
Your thoughts?
//Disclaimer: I'm not involved in/with CP in any manner whatsoever, I only believe that it should be "legal" in the same manner free speech is. I believe NOTHING should be censored by ANY governing body, rather, it should be with products and services offered by private entities that CP and other related things should be "blocked for viewing" solely at the behest of the end-user. And yes, then I would encourage any such user to turn that "feature" on to block questionable material. But in the general scheme of things: ZERO CENSORSHIP.
//P.S.: Please pardon spelling/grammatical errors, I don't have time to check what I've written.
EDIT: HN, please stop downmodding/marking/whatever-you-call-it-here me, it would be against the HN-etiquette as I understand it (downvote for troll behavior, but not for differing opinions). Furthermore, I invite any discussion that goes against what I have said to what I have said. Cheers!
Im not going to reply except to say that your simply using this as a soapbox to sound off on your version of freedom of speech and anti-censorship. Are the children subjected to CP free? Why does the freedom of XYZ person who wants to see children (children here, 3 or 4 years olds or younger for example) come before the freedom of 100's of youngsters who are abused.
I thoroughly encourage you to actually come try ot work in the industry before making claims that it is against free speech :)
> I thoroughly encourage you to actually come try ot work in the industry before making claims that it is against free speech :)
Although I have never worked in anything involving investigation of CP, I do have experience in other fields in which I gained insight that I believe is relevant here in these matters. In real life I do stick to my guns and practise what I preach.
> Are the children subjected to CP free?
I'm not exactly sure I understand what you mean by 'free'. Though, the decision whether a child participates in CP or not should ultimately rest on that child.
> Why does the freedom of XYZ person who wants to see children (children here, 3 or 4 years olds or younger for example) come before the freedom of 100's of youngsters who are abused.
You've totally misconstrued what I've said.
By all means, if children really get that kick out of it that they'd like to do it for free then let them, but I would normally expect them [or their parents] to charge a fee and pursue CP as a business just like normal pornography is nowadays.
What I really have trouble realizing is how appreciating a youthful body is inappropriate. I don't think it is, I think it's simply natural.
Down to it, what is so fundamentally wrong with CP? There is no universal consensus of what is beautiful, what is ugly -- the human libido desires whatever it desires; black, white, brown, tall, fat, short, thin, male, female, etc. etc. Why is it a problem that one person prefers the flesh that of the youth? Centuries ago, the traditional relationship actually WAS between one person of considerably older age with one of a significantly younger age.
I anticipate the following responses:
1) Because it indirectly creates a demand for CP in general and it is thereby criminal.
2.1) Because it is immoral (religiously, culturally, etc.)
2.2) Because children aren't mature enough to decide for themselves, they should not be involved in CP and adults should not pursue relationships with them.
My responses:
1) Which is precisely why it should be made legal. I think it would expunge the market of concretely illegal media. This, in my thinking, is appropriately analogous to the drug situation. If drug X is legalized, the availability of a safer form of drug X would likely appear in market and the impure, dangerous forms of it would naturally cease to circulate (in ideal conditions). OBVIOUSLY I don't condone any physical violence toward anyone. One thing that I CANNOT wrap my head around is BSDM-related porn. And by God, if anyone harms their child, or any other's for that matter, get them some counseling. Pronto.
2) It is decided merely as such by the culture. I take it that the general populace on HN is of atheists -- why then, as atheists, would you shun the the preference of a certain type of body as unnatural, immoral, or illegal?
Your thoughts?
//Disclaimer: I'm not involved in/with CP in any manner whatsoever, I only believe that it should be "legal" in the same manner free speech is. I believe NOTHING should be censored by ANY governing body, rather, it should be with products and services offered by private entities that CP and other related things should be "blocked for viewing" solely at the behest of the end-user. And yes, then I would encourage any such user to turn that "feature" on to block questionable material. But in the general scheme of things: ZERO CENSORSHIP.
//P.S.: Please pardon spelling/grammatical errors, I don't have time to check what I've written.
EDIT: HN, please stop downmodding/marking/whatever-you-call-it-here me, it would be against the HN-etiquette as I understand it (downvote for troll behavior, but not for differing opinions). Furthermore, I invite any discussion that goes against what I have said to what I have said. Cheers!