Are we doing the "meeee, slippery slope" argument?
We are very clearly talking about the creation of images that imitate the appearance of children, designed to produce sexual stimulation and response. A physical recreation. It is not simply a thought crime. It is a clear line.
Acknowledging the obvious argument I will make doesn't make the argument wrong, but good try there.
It is a clear line.
It isn't and the fact that you think it is shows how little thought you've put into it. You should try reading the Supreme Court case on it, you might learn something.
But I guess someone who goes with "hey, you don't want to look like a BAD GUY for defending this do you? Don't defend it, just let it happen" as a rationale doesn't want to delve into complexities and consequences. Better to just stick with "ME NO LIKE" as all legal basis.
You think I care about the Supreme Court's opinion on pornography? I am decades on this earth beyond that. "Know it when I see it" or what John Ashcroft has to say about the matter is irrelevant.
The original point stands. Do not waste your time providing cover for content of such a profane nature. It is not an argument in support of personal freedom. It is an argument in support of cultural degeneracy.
You think I care about the Supreme Court's opinion on pornography?
It was actually on the specific metric when it goes from Child Porn to Not in regards to simulation of such, a very relevant discussion on legality even if you disagree with their conclusion.
But no I didn't, that's what the last paragraph was conveying. You've already plugged your ears to learning or thinking and now are trying to pathetically threaten people into following suit with sad "you will look gross if you do this!" level discourse.
Fortunately for those in charge, useful idiots like you are a dime a dozen to vote for censorship if they package it in "think of the children!" paper.
Are we doing the "meeee, slippery slope" argument?
We are very clearly talking about the creation of images that imitate the appearance of children, designed to produce sexual stimulation and response. A physical recreation. It is not simply a thought crime. It is a clear line.
Acknowledging the obvious argument I will make doesn't make the argument wrong, but good try there.
It isn't and the fact that you think it is shows how little thought you've put into it. You should try reading the Supreme Court case on it, you might learn something.
But I guess someone who goes with "hey, you don't want to look like a BAD GUY for defending this do you? Don't defend it, just let it happen" as a rationale doesn't want to delve into complexities and consequences. Better to just stick with "ME NO LIKE" as all legal basis.
You think I care about the Supreme Court's opinion on pornography? I am decades on this earth beyond that. "Know it when I see it" or what John Ashcroft has to say about the matter is irrelevant.
The original point stands. Do not waste your time providing cover for content of such a profane nature. It is not an argument in support of personal freedom. It is an argument in support of cultural degeneracy.
It was actually on the specific metric when it goes from Child Porn to Not in regards to simulation of such, a very relevant discussion on legality even if you disagree with their conclusion.
But no I didn't, that's what the last paragraph was conveying. You've already plugged your ears to learning or thinking and now are trying to pathetically threaten people into following suit with sad "you will look gross if you do this!" level discourse.
Fortunately for those in charge, useful idiots like you are a dime a dozen to vote for censorship if they package it in "think of the children!" paper.
That’s a lot of words to just tell everyone you actively support pedophilia.