3 ms·

Is it wrong to rape someone who is unconscious, who would never know what you did? What if you rape them then murder them? Sure, the murder is unethical, but sh

Is it wrong to rape someone who is unconscious, who would never know what you did? What if you rape them then murder them? Sure, the murder is unethical, but should you still be held accountable for the rape? Also consider the viewer of the child pornography. They have no way of knowing if the victim is aware of the video, or the victim's opinion about the video. So if they go forward and view it without caring if harm was caused, isn't that wrong?

etplayer 9y ago
>Is it wrong to rape someone who is unconscious, who would never know what you did? Perhaps I was too hasty. Of course it's wrong, even if they didn't know. But in this case, the actual harm you're claiming exists (and I agree that it can exist) is knowledge itself. The knowledge is a side effect; if this side effect can be stopped from manifesting itself, then the harm is no longer done. i.e rape involves harm not through knowledge but by matter of fact, by its very definition. This is not the case with the crime of possessing child pornography. With regard to death, I'm not sure what your point is - your argument for harm caused by knowledge does not hold up when the victim of the harm is dead. Of course that dosen't mean that it's OK to kill the victim, but if that were to happen, it would eliminate the crime of harm by knowledge. >So if they go forward and view it without caring if harm was caused, isn't that wrong? Not if there was no harm caused. I'm becoming more skeptical of this argument. If knowledge that something is happening constitutes sufficient harm, then would it follow that somebody laughing at you in another coutry, which you know to be happening somehow (such as being told by a friend), can be considered as harm?
- openasocket 9y ago
  I'm afraid I've lost the thread of this a bit. What exactly are you advocating? Are you proposing a change in the law? Or are we strictly in the land of ethics?
  - etplayer 9y ago
    Yes, I am proposing a change that such material should not be illegal to possess. As to distribution, I have not made up my mind.

etplayer 9y ago

>Is it wrong to rape someone who is unconscious, who would never know what you did? Perhaps I was too hasty. Of course it's wrong, even if they didn't know. But in this case, the actual harm you're claiming exists (and I agree that it can exist) is knowledge itself. The knowledge is a side effect; if this side effect can be stopped from manifesting itself, then the harm is no longer done. i.e rape involves harm not through knowledge but by matter of fact, by its very definition. This is not the case with the crime of possessing child pornography. With regard to death, I'm not sure what your point is - your argument for harm caused by knowledge does not hold up when the victim of the harm is dead. Of course that dosen't mean that it's OK to kill the victim, but if that were to happen, it would eliminate the crime of harm by knowledge. >So if they go forward and view it without caring if harm was caused, isn't that wrong? Not if there was no harm caused. I'm becoming more skeptical of this argument. If knowledge that something is happening constitutes sufficient harm, then would it follow that somebody laughing at you in another coutry, which you know to be happening somehow (such as being told by a friend), can be considered as harm?

openasocket 9y ago
I'm afraid I've lost the thread of this a bit. What exactly are you advocating? Are you proposing a change in the law? Or are we strictly in the land of ethics?
- etplayer 9y ago
  Yes, I am proposing a change that such material should not be illegal to possess. As to distribution, I have not made up my mind.