3 ms·

If those countries have laws against making and consuming pedophile pictures and drawings (or "artwork"), I feel it's perfectly fine for people making and consu

by forty 10mo ago

If those countries have laws against making and consuming pedophile pictures and drawings (or "artwork"), I feel it's perfectly fine for people making and consuming those to be raided, even if they disagree with the law (if people could opt out of all laws they don't agree with, I'mnot sure what would be the point of making laws). What is not ok is to watch the activities of everyone who is not a pedophile in order to catch those, otherwise when does it stop? Should they have cameras in every room of your home just in case?

ranyume 10mo ago
I read this as "It's perfectly fine to persecute people for their art". And boy, you're on the wrong side of history.
- forty 10mo ago
  There are all kinds of things you might qualify as "art" which are forbidden in my country (France) - for example if your "art" is about drawing nazi symbols you hopefully are going to have troubles - and I don't have a problem with having pedophile content in that list.
  - ranyume 10mo ago
    Does france really prosecute people for only showing nazi symbols, independent of context? So for example, documentary series are forbidden? To be clear, I still stand by what I said, but I don't think it's fair to equate "pedophile art" with nazi symbology. What I said is meant to be taken as a powerful but general rule that cautions against restricting art (and thus, restricting thought and expression) on the basis of fuzzy logic, hatred towards the content, racism, or any other sort of bias not supported by reality. In this regard, I don't think the logic behind restricting "pedophile art" has the same weight as the logic behind restricting nazi symbology (not even close).
deltoidmaximus 10mo ago
> Should they have cameras in every room of your home just in case? Given that most children are abused by some one they know that might actually be a more effective way to prevent it than whatever they're doing here. I'm sure they'll get to that eventually.

by forty 10mo ago

ranyume 10mo ago

I read this as "It's perfectly fine to persecute people for their art". And boy, you're on the wrong side of history.

forty 10mo ago
There are all kinds of things you might qualify as "art" which are forbidden in my country (France) - for example if your "art" is about drawing nazi symbols you hopefully are going to have troubles - and I don't have a problem with having pedophile content in that list.
- ranyume 10mo ago
  Does france really prosecute people for only showing nazi symbols, independent of context? So for example, documentary series are forbidden? To be clear, I still stand by what I said, but I don't think it's fair to equate "pedophile art" with nazi symbology. What I said is meant to be taken as a powerful but general rule that cautions against restricting art (and thus, restricting thought and expression) on the basis of fuzzy logic, hatred towards the content, racism, or any other sort of bias not supported by reality. In this regard, I don't think the logic behind restricting "pedophile art" has the same weight as the logic behind restricting nazi symbology (not even close).

deltoidmaximus 10mo ago

> Should they have cameras in every room of your home just in case? Given that most children are abused by some one they know that might actually be a more effective way to prevent it than whatever they're doing here. I'm sure they'll get to that eventually.