Debate @COME ON OUT YOU RAPIST on the slippery slope of making loli porn illegal - At the user's own request.

[Osama Bin Laden]

As a rule, I don't like playing court reporter with the logs. This disagreement has nothing to do with me and I'm staying out of it.

I understand and respect your decision.

 

[Gravemind]

Free speech includes speech you don't like. People can say "hate speech serves no purpose".

Way to ignore literally everything else in that post.

"Give someone enough rope and they'll hang themselves".

I didn't think I would use this twice in one day, but

 

[Polyarmory]

Free speech includes speech you don't like. People can say "hate speech serves no purpose".

Let's cut to the chase then: Is actual CSAM just "speech I don't like"?

Now that we're done with the chase:

• Is saying "Fire!" in a crowded movie theatre "speech I don't like"?
• Is making an actionable threat like "I will assassinate such-and-such at this place and time using this method. I promise, and am 100% sincere." just speech I don't like?
• What about fighting words?

There are already plenty of exceptions to the first amendment for stuff like this that have existed for over a century without being used as a pretense to slip up a slope.

ETA: And, again, if you generate an AI image to jack off to without sending it to somebody, nothing about that is speech.

 

[News Enjoyer]

I have no interest in publicly debating people who are going to strawman what I have to say nor replying to posts that ignore the point I have made in favor of calling me names. So, I'm just going to summarise my comments here:

• The US federal government already made it clear that anything indistinguishable from a real child is effectively child porn. We don't need state levels that are only going to muddy the water and waste everyone's time.
• I have zero interest in defending people who publicly declare themselves "lolicons/shotcons"; my interest lies entirely with governments giving themselves more power over the internet for moralfagging.
• Pretty much all the replies I've gotten are flimsy, at best, or can apply to similar moralfagging topics like violent video games.

This is a red herring. The government is not your babysitter. Children do not need unrestricted access to the internet at all times. If you're worried about what happens when your kid leave your front door, that you're not doing your job. It's up to you to make sure your child isn't hanging out with bad influences. It's up to you to make sure your child has the moral standing to avoid being tempted by vices. You know, Proverbs 22:6? "Train children in the right way, and when old they will not stray."

So, yeah, I guess my main thesis is: tell parents to do their fucking job.

Furry avatar wants to defend furry avatar on the topic of child porn, how unexpected.

 

[Osama Bin Laden]

Furry avatar wants to defend furry avatar on the topic of child porn, how unexpected.

day of the cope is a pretty fitting username with all things considered

 

[Day of the Cope]

Way to ignore literally everything else in that post.

Is actual CSAM just "speech I don't like"?

No.

Is saying "Fire!" in a crowded movie theatre "speech I don't like"?

Ah, the "fire in a crowded movie theatre". You do realise that analogy was used the 1918 trial of Eugene V. Debs where Debs made an anti-war speech that was viewed as violating the Espionage Act of 1917, right? It was literally the government shutting down dissent.

Is making an actionable threat like "I will assassinate such-and-such at this place and time using this method. I promise, and am 100% sincere." just speech I don't like?

No, because it's an actionable threat. It's no different to my previous comment about incitement.

What about fighting words?

"Talk shit, get hit. Simple as."

 

[Polyarmory]

No, it's an actionable threat.

That's just putting a label on speech. If you announce your intent, that is, without any ambiguity, speech. You sound like you hate free speech. Do you not understand what a slippery slope that is???

 

[Whatevermancer]

tell parents to do their fucking job.

Problem is, telling parents is not enough, cause being told can be easily ignored. Therefore the government has to step in and force citizens to behave in a certain way.
For the benefit of the society as a whole.

 

[Karen of Human Resources]

Wanting to make possession or production of sexual images of children normal makes you a nonce

Can the weeb mind not comprehend wanting to fuck children is not normal?

Anime delenda est

 

[Patrick Bait-man]

Holy FUCK you niggers are at this AGAIN?

Me after the 420691337th lolicon debate thread on kiwifarms.st:

 

[Day of the Cope]

That's just putting a label on speech. If you announce your intent, that is, without any ambiguity, speech. You sound like you hate free speech. Do you not understand what a slippery slope that is???

Ah, so it was all an attempt to act in bad faith.

Problem is, telling parents is not enough, cause being told can be easily ignored. Therefore the government has to step in and force citizens to behave in a certain way.

Oh yeah, because that's gone well historically.

 

[Whatevermancer]

Oh yeah, because that's gone well historically.

That's how it's been working the entire history.

 

[Polyarmory]

Ah, so it was all an attempt to act in bad faith.

No, you retard, I was turning your hate speech example back on you. If any category of speech is forbidden, then there is a risk that other speech will be falsely categorized in order to get it banned. What I was saying is that it's sometimes possible for a category of speech to be clearly defined enough not get abused, and this is one such example.

That being said, I'm 95% sure you're trolling, and while I've enjoyed being trolled, I'm going to leave it at this.

 

[Gravemind]

Holy FUCK you niggers are at this AGAIN?

Me after the 420691337th lolicon debate thread on kiwifarms.st:
View attachment 7093603

In fairness, @COME ON OUT YOU RAPIST requested the thread. I just obliged the request.

 

[WelperHelper99]

Ah, so it was all an attempt to act in bad faith.

Oh yeah, because that's gone well historically.

I don't care lolbert. You defend pedophiles. Face the wall for your lead injection

 

[Osama Bin Laden]

That being said, I'm 95% sure you're trolling, and while I've enjoyed being trolled, I'm going to leave it at this.

i'm just gonna call them a pedophile and move on

 

[Day of the Cope]

Holy FUCK you niggers are at this AGAIN?

Me after the 420691337th lolicon debate thread on kiwifarms.st:
View attachment 7093603

When your snowed in mid-March, you'll take whatever entertainment you can find.

No, you retard, I was turning your hate speech example back on you. If any category of speech is forbidden, then there is a risk that other speech will be falsely categorized in order to get it banned. What I was saying is that it's sometimes possible for a category of speech to be clearly defined enough not get abused, and this is one such example.

That being said, I'm 95% sure you're trolling, and while I've enjoyed being trolled, I'm going to leave it at this.

You're trying to conflate "I hate the Jews" with "I think you should go beat that Jew".
Alexa, look up his early life section...

 

[NotClavicular]

When your snowed in mid-March, you'll take whatever entertainment you can find.

You're trying to conflate "I hate the Jews" with "I think you should go beat that Jew".
Alexa, look up his early life section...

Interesting how your pfp says ''Tiny and stupid' which is eerily similar to 'Cute and funny' (Lolicon/Pedophile dogwhistle)

 

[Day of the Cope]

Interesting how your pfp says ''Tiny and stupid' which is eerily similar to 'Cute and funny' (Lolicon/Pedophile dogwhistle)

"When you talk about orcs, it sounds eerily similar to black people. Please stop using such racist language."

 

[NotClavicular]

"When you say orcs, I think of black people. Please stop using such racist language."

You're defending lolicons and made multiple replies in the 'Lolicon/Shotacon Defenders' thread
It's very likely that you're a lolicon