where if you choose to open in new tab, the original tab and the new one are automatically shaded a new color, color chosen randomly. so if you have 8 open tabs, 3 might be green, 2 might be purple: it shows a relationship. effortless and intuitive
there i said those two words in relation to a windows product. you may now pillory me for my sacriledge
don't stray from mom and dad and go in the woods or the crazy lady will eat you
its a kids story, with a useful function, and also probably an oral historical memory of when this was real
"long pig" is the name in the south pacific for human meat. because, obviously, we taste like pig
which, as a lover of bacon, makes me a little nervous: i'd probably like the taste
i would wager that every single eyeball reading these words is the offspring, some great-great-great-ancestor, ate human flesh at some point
you can feel morally repulsed by that diea, but the human stomach outweighs your moral compass when push comes to shove, and famine was not an uncommon thing in human history
there doesn't have to be a chain of command. the "industry" is informal
and i can't give you hard numbers. no one can. because it is a shady business. you say you need hard numbers before you form a coherent opinion. this is intellectually dishonest of you, because you know it is impossible to get what you demand. therefore, you need to proceed with a best guess understanding of the reality of the situation based on a number of sources, all of which are at your fingertips and are as little biased as possible, and come to the conclusion as to whether or not this material needs to be censored in order to fight its proliferation
you seem to be currently of the opinion that its a mirage, and the entire spectre is rigged to censor you with impunity. its an excuse to form a power grab and control your media. there is apparently some agent smith or lord palpatine out to rob you of your rights for no other reason than cartoonishness. paranoid schizophrenia
or, alternately, perhaps child pornography is real, and there are well-meaning stodgy bureaucrats in your government who... get this... actually mean well and are concerned about it? i know, can you believe it? what a radical theory of mine: the government is composed of... drum roll please... normal people? rather than cartoonish characteratures of power mad monsters? kind of a wacky thought of mine, huh?
now hold onto your hats, because i get really radical now: the technological methods at their disposal for stopping and controlling child porn is weak. so the best alternative for them to pursue it is via censorship of the child pornography material, and only the child pornography material
oh no wait! i'm sorry, to censor completely unrelated stuff in secret to control your MIND dude. BWAHAHAHAHAHA
this would seem to be a prudent appraisal of the reality you find yourself in (!?)
but naaah. real dreary life is boring. we all know real life is a mirage. there is a secret hollywood b-grade plot device in control of everything! its exciting for my dim mind to have these fantasies!
in fact... i have a secret for you
i am not just some fool here debating you on slashdot because i am an earnest sheep and believing of the government propaganda. no: shhh... i am an agent of the illuminati sent to cast aspersions on your "deep insights" into the true alternate reality! we can't let you, who has figured out the real truth while everyone else is fooled, publish these fantastic findings!
excuse me while i go write some more overtly biased propaganda about mythological child porn in order to steal your rights!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
(lightning bolts)
if you haven't guessed, i am making fun of you, and have no respect for you at all. you are a weak mind
"Child abuse is a very real problem and something should be done about it, but it happens in the families themselves, not in the Internet and not for money"
this is willful ignorance
how do you argue with someone who bases their statements in direct contradiction to reality?
ok, ok... when pressed, it exists, but its not a big deal
pffffft
dude, you're ignorant. no, you really are ignorant. your words define you as a willfully ignorant person. your words are as close to the concept of ignorance as can ever be understood
Children of all ages, including infants,[21] are abused in the production of pornography internationally.[4][9] The United States Department of Justice estimates that pornographers have recorded the abuse of more than one million children in the United States alone.[13] There is an increasing trend towards younger victims and greater brutality; according to Flint Waters, an investigator with the federal Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force, "These guys are raping infants and toddlers. You can hear the child crying, pleading for help in the video. It is horrendous."[22] According to the World Congress against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Chilrdren, "While impossible to obtain accurate data, a perusal of the child pornography readily available on the international market indicates that a significant number of children are being sexually exploited through this medium."[23]
The United Kingdom Children's charity NCH have stated that demand for child pornography on the internet has led to an increase in sex abuse cases, due to an increase in the number of children abused in the production process.[24] In a study analyzing men arrested for child pornography possession in the United States over a one year period from 2000 to 2001, most had pornographic images of prepubescent children (83%) and images graphically depicting sexual penetration (80%). Approximately 1 in 5 (21%) had images depicting violence such as bondage, rape, or torture and most of those involved images of children who were gagged, bound, blindfolded, or otherwise enduring sadistic sex. More than 1 in 3 (39%) had child-pornography videos with motion and sound. 79% also had what might be termed softcore images of nude or semi-nude children, but only 1% possessed such images alone. Law enforcement found about half (48%) had more than 100 graphic still images, and 14% had 1,000 or more graphic images. Forty percent (40%) were "dual offenders," who sexually victimized children and possessed child pornography. [25]
A recent study in Ireland, undertaken by the Garda Síochána, revealed the most serious content in a sample of over 100 cases involving indecent images of children. In 44% of cases, the most serious images depicted nudity or erotic posing, in 7% they depicted sexual activity between children, in 7% they depicted non-penetrative sexual activity between adults and children, in 37% they depicted penetrative sexual activity between adults and children, and in 5% they depicted sadism or bestiality. [3]
Masha Allen, who was adopted at age 8 from the former Soviet Union by an American man who sexually abused her for five years and posted the pictures on the Internet testified before the United States Congress about the anguish she has suffered at the continuing circulation of the pictures of her abuse, to "put a face" on a "sad, abstract, and faceless statistic," and to help pass a law named for her.[26] "Masha's Law," included in the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act passed in 2006, includes a provision which allows young people 18 and over to sue in civil court those who download pornographic images taken of them when they were children.[27] U.S Attorney Bob Balfe stated that 85 percent of those we prosecuted for child pornography are also child molesters.
next, i want you to go to google, type in the obvious search terms on the subject (i'll give you some benefit of the doubt, that you possess the intelle
what you want is to do the right thing without any possibility of risk
there's no such thing in this world
every person who defies anything vile or evil in this world is risking their life and limb
and they are heroes for that
you don't sound like a hero. your concerns make you sound like a serf, or a slave
post the shit and stick your chest out and be proud of yourself regardless of the consequences. or go slink and hide as a coward. there is no middle way. there is no possibility of doing the heroic thing in a cowardly way
but i don't think its fair to compare him with a leader in guatemala who outright murders his opponents
furthermore, brown hasn't a tenth of the charismatic demagoguery of a chavez or a putin. he's more bumbling frankenstein than dextrous devil
when push comes to shove, brown will fade away easily. he will not be rewriting the constitution or appointing lackeys like medvedev to run the government while he sits in shadow rule
so thank the stars for brown. if he's the worse the uk can foist to the top, the uk is doing spectacular
"I happen to choose to differentiate that from censorship"
no, you purposefully colluded the act of censorship with the act of criminal prosecution, as if it were an either/ or choice. you created a false dichotomy, and a straw man's argument. you reacted to what i was saying as if i am somehow arguing for censorship RATHER THAN criminal prosecution. no, censorship is a valid tool to be used along side criminal prosecution in the realm of child porn
" I might choose to differentiate prosecuting a black man for murder from a policy of imprisoning all men of color."
what the fuck?
my head asplode
i can't begin to understand how that is germaine or allegorical to anything having to do with censoring child pornography
see, you'll never stop creating trash. you're never going to win the war on trash. its always going to accumulate, no matter what you do. so you should let the trash sit in your room and fester, and live in it
going after hardcore addictive drugs (not marijuana, that should be legal), or going after child porn, or going after terrorists, are not wars that ever will be won, ever. its simply a maintenance function, like taking ou the trash every week
there will always exist child porn, highly addictive drugs, and terrorists. but you fight these things anyway, simply to MINIMIZE their existence and the damage they do, and simply because you have a human conscience and a sense of simple human justice that innocent human lives are being destroyed by these things (or, rather, you SHOULD have that human conscience)
you honestly wish to assert that the creation and consumption of child pornography is a myth
you really wish to put that out there as a statement you believe in
hilarious or pathetic, i can't decide
or: congratulations troll, you got me. that someone would actually believe what you just wrote definitely blows my mind. that people can be that blind and retarded
and... that censoring child porn is worse than sanctioning someone just for speaking their political opinion!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ignorance is a truly bottomless pit. just when you think you've heard something truly bottom of the barrel ignorant, someone else says something even more fucking retarded
and not in any way a refutation of anything i said. so now you are just changing the subject
grey areas exist about what is child porn and what is not. duh
so now you are saying that just because grey areas exist in this world, that means there is no such thing as obviously vile and disgusting dark areas? that everyone agrees is wrong and should be punished?
say: an 8 year old in guatemala lured into a car with candy, and locked in a basement room and repeatedly abused. does this happen in this world or not? should it be punished in your mind or not? why did it happen? because a bunch of pedophiles desired this content be created for their consumption on their monitors? is this connection between demand and supply real or not?
censorship is just a tool, and perfectly valid in the case of child porn
are you honestly trying to assert that when and if child porn is found, it shouldn't be stricken?
aka: censored
if some fool puts child porn on a webpage, what do you do? leave it up there? no, you take it down. that's censorship. duh
these valid censroship activities has no bearing on your other observations about criminal prosecutions of creators and consumers. my observations on censorship in the realm of child porn stand separate and supplementary to the regular criminal proceedings you refer to
nowhere did i say or infer that censorship was a replacement for regular criminal prosecutions. this is bizarre assertion on your part that has no meaning or logical coherence
you have a responsibility for free trade coffee, the stopping of blood diamonds, and the lowering of carbon dioxide levels
were you trying to agree with parent or are you really that stupid?
"By your own logic, your continued existence on this planet is inherently harmful to others. Please cease and desist."
yes, your existence puts a contraint on society and the planet. but you don't commit suicide, you just act responsibly, and insist that others do the same. like: if you support the creation of child porn by seeking it out, you will be punished. duh
AND the marketplace. going after just supply, or going after just demand, is ineffective and half-assed. ineffective at what? at minimizing the damage of child porn. you will never stop child porn 100%, i'm not a utopianist idealist, but you have a moral obligation to go after child porn vigorously, which includes pnishing those who seek out child pron, thereby creating the demand for the creation fo child porn. without over stepping your bounds into the grey areas of course. i'm talking about the obvious, no grey area, abuse of children for the consumption of pictures on computer monitors
My ideology doesn't demand that child porn be censored.
Oh I'm sorry, when you said "ANY" I didn't realize you meant "ANY that agree with my own ideology regarding the issue of censoring child porn."
sorry, my bad: i should have prefaced the word ideology with logically coherent ideology
what you call your ideology isn't an ideology, its a teenager's half-assed half-thought. because if you take what you just stated as your ideology to its logical conclusion, you don't have a coherent social policy which effectively serves simple human nature and simple human behavior
fact: the desire to consume child porn in the form of images drives its creation. therefore, you fight child porn by going after its consumers as well as its creators. and yes, you will never stop child porn, you are 100% correct. just like you will never stop murder, or rape. as if this is a logical reason to stop punishing crimes in the name of justice and a human conscience. pfffffft
"hey, look: i have a list of gray areas. because gray areas exist, i forbid you from going after the truly vile"
the world is complicated, there are lots of gray areas. so what? this means we can't go after the obviously wrong? the existence of grey areas is no rationale for ceasing the punishment of prosecution of people who are truly vile, who CREATE the marketplace for child porn by purposely seeking it out. you censor and punish the consumers of child porn just as much as the creators, because both supply and demand is the problem, not one or the other
because you might shoot an innocent person and not just a criminal?
so you are against stem cell research?
because you might clone a person instead of cure paralysis?
you are against nuclear tech?
because you might build a bomb instead of power a city with soemthign cleaner than coal?
are you against penises?
because you might rape a woman instead of love her?
all retarded lines of thought. which what you just wrote matches perfectly: "because we might do something bad with [x], regardless of our intent, we can't do [x] at all"
just scrolling down to the first 5 comments above a 3 threshold in the 3 randomly chosen recent threads below on the topic, in 2 or 3 of the comments out of the 5, one finds the retarded idea that censoring *anything* is as bad as the worst censoring places on the globe. which is 100% wrong, and commonly found thinking all over slashdot. no, censorship of something like child porn is not anything remotely like censoring political speech, yet it is a common line of thought here on slashdot. its fucking retarded and outright 100% logically, philosophically, and morally wrong. and commonly found in comments here
obvious answer: the desire to view child pornography creates a marketplace for the creation of child porn
child porn just doesn't happen by accident, and people just happen to see it by accident. which is how you describe the situation, which is of course 100% bullshit
someone seeks out the images on purpose, and someone else fulfills this need because there is demand for it
this really should be pretty obvious
the viewing of child pornography is a desire that contributes to the creation of it, and is therefore a desire which is criminally culpable for the act of creating child pornography
are fed by the desire to consume them by viewing them
in other words, child pornogrpahy is not created as static images that are just randomly found objects. those who seek to view them are what drives their creation. you do admit that obvious observation, right?
they are created for the explicit purpose of someone else viewing them. you are being intellectually dishonest by attempting to separate the viewing of child porn from the creation of child porn, when child porn is made for the explicit purpose of viewing children being abused
the act of seeking the pictures out contributes to their creation, creates the market for them, creates the impetus to create the pictures
you honestly wish to assert to me, that because there exist grey areas in this world that are difficult to agree upon, that we can't define some things as truly evil?
ok, i grant you that there are depictions that some call child porn that are really harmless
now, in the interest of intellectual honesty, you grant to me to that there are some depictions of children in sexual situations in this world which are nothing but the act of psychological damaging of a child
Slashdot Mirror
where if you choose to open in new tab, the original tab and the new one are automatically shaded a new color, color chosen randomly. so if you have 8 open tabs, 3 might be green, 2 might be purple: it shows a relationship. effortless and intuitive
there i said those two words in relation to a windows product. you may now pillory me for my sacriledge
just ask these rugby players in a plane crash
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uruguayan_Air_Force_Flight_571
and make sure you get invited to a dinner party, not a donner party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donner_Party
don't stray from mom and dad and go in the woods or the crazy lady will eat you
its a kids story, with a useful function, and also probably an oral historical memory of when this was real
"long pig" is the name in the south pacific for human meat. because, obviously, we taste like pig
which, as a lover of bacon, makes me a little nervous: i'd probably like the taste
i would wager that every single eyeball reading these words is the offspring, some great-great-great-ancestor, ate human flesh at some point
you can feel morally repulsed by that diea, but the human stomach outweighs your moral compass when push comes to shove, and famine was not an uncommon thing in human history
go to any number of african towns and you'll find guys coming back from the jungle with monkey parts to eat. its called bushmeat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushmeat#Effect_on_Great_Apes
there doesn't have to be a chain of command. the "industry" is informal
and i can't give you hard numbers. no one can. because it is a shady business. you say you need hard numbers before you form a coherent opinion. this is intellectually dishonest of you, because you know it is impossible to get what you demand. therefore, you need to proceed with a best guess understanding of the reality of the situation based on a number of sources, all of which are at your fingertips and are as little biased as possible, and come to the conclusion as to whether or not this material needs to be censored in order to fight its proliferation
you seem to be currently of the opinion that its a mirage, and the entire spectre is rigged to censor you with impunity. its an excuse to form a power grab and control your media. there is apparently some agent smith or lord palpatine out to rob you of your rights for no other reason than cartoonishness. paranoid schizophrenia
or, alternately, perhaps child pornography is real, and there are well-meaning stodgy bureaucrats in your government who... get this... actually mean well and are concerned about it? i know, can you believe it? what a radical theory of mine: the government is composed of... drum roll please... normal people? rather than cartoonish characteratures of power mad monsters? kind of a wacky thought of mine, huh?
now hold onto your hats, because i get really radical now: the technological methods at their disposal for stopping and controlling child porn is weak. so the best alternative for them to pursue it is via censorship of the child pornography material, and only the child pornography material
oh no wait! i'm sorry, to censor completely unrelated stuff in secret to control your MIND dude. BWAHAHAHAHAHA
this would seem to be a prudent appraisal of the reality you find yourself in (!?)
but naaah. real dreary life is boring. we all know real life is a mirage. there is a secret hollywood b-grade plot device in control of everything! its exciting for my dim mind to have these fantasies!
in fact... i have a secret for you
i am not just some fool here debating you on slashdot because i am an earnest sheep and believing of the government propaganda. no: shhh... i am an agent of the illuminati sent to cast aspersions on your "deep insights" into the true alternate reality! we can't let you, who has figured out the real truth while everyone else is fooled, publish these fantastic findings!
excuse me while i go write some more overtly biased propaganda about mythological child porn in order to steal your rights!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA
(lightning bolts)
if you haven't guessed, i am making fun of you, and have no respect for you at all. you are a weak mind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography#Internet_proliferation
READ retard
LEARN
then open your ignorant mouth
"Child abuse is a very real problem and something should be done about it, but it happens in the families themselves, not in the Internet and not for money"
this is willful ignorance
how do you argue with someone who bases their statements in direct contradiction to reality?
like: child porn is a myth
ok, ok... when pressed, it exists, but its not a big deal
pffffft
dude, you're ignorant. no, you really are ignorant. your words define you as a willfully ignorant person. your words are as close to the concept of ignorance as can ever be understood
you need education
here, start your education:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Pornography#Child_sexual_abuse_in_production_and_distribution
next, i want you to go to google, type in the obvious search terms on the subject (i'll give you some benefit of the doubt, that you possess the intelle
you lack the character
what you want is to do the right thing without any possibility of risk
there's no such thing in this world
every person who defies anything vile or evil in this world is risking their life and limb
and they are heroes for that
you don't sound like a hero. your concerns make you sound like a serf, or a slave
post the shit and stick your chest out and be proud of yourself regardless of the consequences. or go slink and hide as a coward. there is no middle way. there is no possibility of doing the heroic thing in a cowardly way
but i don't think its fair to compare him with a leader in guatemala who outright murders his opponents
furthermore, brown hasn't a tenth of the charismatic demagoguery of a chavez or a putin. he's more bumbling frankenstein than dextrous devil
when push comes to shove, brown will fade away easily. he will not be rewriting the constitution or appointing lackeys like medvedev to run the government while he sits in shadow rule
so thank the stars for brown. if he's the worse the uk can foist to the top, the uk is doing spectacular
"I happen to choose to differentiate that from censorship"
no, you purposefully colluded the act of censorship with the act of criminal prosecution, as if it were an either/ or choice. you created a false dichotomy, and a straw man's argument. you reacted to what i was saying as if i am somehow arguing for censorship RATHER THAN criminal prosecution. no, censorship is a valid tool to be used along side criminal prosecution in the realm of child porn
" I might choose to differentiate prosecuting a black man for murder from a policy of imprisoning all men of color."
what the fuck?
my head asplode
i can't begin to understand how that is germaine or allegorical to anything having to do with censoring child pornography
well, stop
see, you'll never stop creating trash. you're never going to win the war on trash. its always going to accumulate, no matter what you do. so you should let the trash sit in your room and fester, and live in it
going after hardcore addictive drugs (not marijuana, that should be legal), or going after child porn, or going after terrorists, are not wars that ever will be won, ever. its simply a maintenance function, like taking ou the trash every week
there will always exist child porn, highly addictive drugs, and terrorists. but you fight these things anyway, simply to MINIMIZE their existence and the damage they do, and simply because you have a human conscience and a sense of simple human justice that innocent human lives are being destroyed by these things (or, rather, you SHOULD have that human conscience)
or are you really that stupid?
you honestly wish to assert that the creation and consumption of child pornography is a myth
you really wish to put that out there as a statement you believe in
hilarious or pathetic, i can't decide
or: congratulations troll, you got me. that someone would actually believe what you just wrote definitely blows my mind. that people can be that blind and retarded
and... that censoring child porn is worse than sanctioning someone just for speaking their political opinion!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
ignorance is a truly bottomless pit. just when you think you've heard something truly bottom of the barrel ignorant, someone else says something even more fucking retarded
you either laugh or you cry
you sir are comic relief, and a grade A moron
and not in any way a refutation of anything i said. so now you are just changing the subject
grey areas exist about what is child porn and what is not. duh
so now you are saying that just because grey areas exist in this world, that means there is no such thing as obviously vile and disgusting dark areas? that everyone agrees is wrong and should be punished?
say: an 8 year old in guatemala lured into a car with candy, and locked in a basement room and repeatedly abused. does this happen in this world or not? should it be punished in your mind or not? why did it happen? because a bunch of pedophiles desired this content be created for their consumption on their monitors? is this connection between demand and supply real or not?
wake up
censorship is just a tool, and perfectly valid in the case of child porn
are you honestly trying to assert that when and if child porn is found, it shouldn't be stricken?
aka: censored
if some fool puts child porn on a webpage, what do you do? leave it up there? no, you take it down. that's censorship. duh
these valid censroship activities has no bearing on your other observations about criminal prosecutions of creators and consumers. my observations on censorship in the realm of child porn stand separate and supplementary to the regular criminal proceedings you refer to
nowhere did i say or infer that censorship was a replacement for regular criminal prosecutions. this is bizarre assertion on your part that has no meaning or logical coherence
you are creating a false dichotomy
you have a responsibility for free trade coffee, the stopping of blood diamonds, and the lowering of carbon dioxide levels
were you trying to agree with parent or are you really that stupid?
"By your own logic, your continued existence on this planet is inherently harmful to others. Please cease and desist."
yes, your existence puts a contraint on society and the planet. but you don't commit suicide, you just act responsibly, and insist that others do the same. like: if you support the creation of child porn by seeking it out, you will be punished. duh
AND the marketplace. going after just supply, or going after just demand, is ineffective and half-assed. ineffective at what? at minimizing the damage of child porn. you will never stop child porn 100%, i'm not a utopianist idealist, but you have a moral obligation to go after child porn vigorously, which includes pnishing those who seek out child pron, thereby creating the demand for the creation fo child porn. without over stepping your bounds into the grey areas of course. i'm talking about the obvious, no grey area, abuse of children for the consumption of pictures on computer monitors
so we shouldn't go after murderers
rape is never going away
so we shouldn't go after rapists
My ideology doesn't demand that child porn be censored.
Oh I'm sorry, when you said "ANY" I didn't realize you meant "ANY that agree with my own ideology regarding the issue of censoring child porn."
sorry, my bad: i should have prefaced the word ideology with logically coherent ideology
what you call your ideology isn't an ideology, its a teenager's half-assed half-thought. because if you take what you just stated as your ideology to its logical conclusion, you don't have a coherent social policy which effectively serves simple human nature and simple human behavior
fact: the desire to consume child porn in the form of images drives its creation. therefore, you fight child porn by going after its consumers as well as its creators. and yes, you will never stop child porn, you are 100% correct. just like you will never stop murder, or rape. as if this is a logical reason to stop punishing crimes in the name of justice and a human conscience. pfffffft
"hey, look: i have a list of gray areas. because gray areas exist, i forbid you from going after the truly vile"
the world is complicated, there are lots of gray areas. so what? this means we can't go after the obviously wrong? the existence of grey areas is no rationale for ceasing the punishment of prosecution of people who are truly vile, who CREATE the marketplace for child porn by purposely seeking it out. you censor and punish the consumers of child porn just as much as the creators, because both supply and demand is the problem, not one or the other
you basically restated my premise back at me and phrased it as if it were in contrast to what i was saying
of course someone can be raped/ abused. that's what i was talking about
which is what is happening with child porn: the desire to consume child porn by viewing it is DRIVING the rape and abuse of children
do you understand that? it's rather straightforward and obvious
because you might shoot an innocent person and not just a criminal?
so you are against stem cell research?
because you might clone a person instead of cure paralysis?
you are against nuclear tech?
because you might build a bomb instead of power a city with soemthign cleaner than coal?
are you against penises?
because you might rape a woman instead of love her?
all retarded lines of thought. which what you just wrote matches perfectly: "because we might do something bad with [x], regardless of our intent, we can't do [x] at all"
you're a luddite. you fear technology
just scrolling down to the first 5 comments above a 3 threshold in the 3 randomly chosen recent threads below on the topic, in 2 or 3 of the comments out of the 5, one finds the retarded idea that censoring *anything* is as bad as the worst censoring places on the globe. which is 100% wrong, and commonly found thinking all over slashdot. no, censorship of something like child porn is not anything remotely like censoring political speech, yet it is a common line of thought here on slashdot. its fucking retarded and outright 100% logically, philosophically, and morally wrong. and commonly found in comments here
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/12/0012255
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/23/1846207
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/1436237
anything else i can help you with?
censoring something like child porn is NOT comparable to censoring political speech
get it in your thick heads slashdot
obvious answer: the desire to view child pornography creates a marketplace for the creation of child porn
child porn just doesn't happen by accident, and people just happen to see it by accident. which is how you describe the situation, which is of course 100% bullshit
someone seeks out the images on purpose, and someone else fulfills this need because there is demand for it
this really should be pretty obvious
the viewing of child pornography is a desire that contributes to the creation of it, and is therefore a desire which is criminally culpable for the act of creating child pornography
are fed by the desire to consume them by viewing them
in other words, child pornogrpahy is not created as static images that are just randomly found objects. those who seek to view them are what drives their creation. you do admit that obvious observation, right?
they are created for the explicit purpose of someone else viewing them. you are being intellectually dishonest by attempting to separate the viewing of child porn from the creation of child porn, when child porn is made for the explicit purpose of viewing children being abused
the act of seeking the pictures out contributes to their creation, creates the market for them, creates the impetus to create the pictures
be intellectually honest
you honestly wish to assert to me, that because there exist grey areas in this world that are difficult to agree upon, that we can't define some things as truly evil?
ok, i grant you that there are depictions that some call child porn that are really harmless
now, in the interest of intellectual honesty, you grant to me to that there are some depictions of children in sexual situations in this world which are nothing but the act of psychological damaging of a child
with me?