Quote:
Originally Posted by recluse
I am perfectly willing to explain my position.
I admit I am overly sensitized about this issue and apologize for any misunderstanding that may have caused.
My comment about "The Will of the People" was originally in response to another poster using it. I simply meant that most of us agree that child molestors are evil.
My point has been that if child molestors and their advocates are comfortable enough in today's society to actually try to publish a guide to their perversion, then something has obviously gone wrong.
I strongly feel that such a work should not be allowed to exist because it has no redeeming moral, historical or artistic value. That it indicates a clear disregard for the law and the rights of children to live without fear.
When I made that statement, I was basically told that it would lead to a domino effect, one that would apparently end in mass book burnings, the end of Freedom of Speech and the collapse of Liberty.
I honestly don't see the connection.
All I am trying to say is that it is obvious that more needs to be done to contain and eradicate this evil. Period.
I have no ulterior motive beyond that.
I never believed you were supporting child molestors.
I thought you believed I trying to dismantle Freedom of Speech as a whole.
I hope I have been able to explain my position and cleared the air.
I accept your apology without reservation.
Just so you know, the applause was from a victim who was told she can't post wanting a molestor killed. I was supporting her right as a victim to say it.
If you need further clarification, just let me know.
|
Thank you for that clarification. I believe we have cleared the air between us completely.
I see no problems with what you wrote above - it makes perfect sense to me. Just as we should not be so paranoid about hypothetical crimes to slide towards greater authoritarianism, we should be careful about the other extreme as well - there's no sense in being so paranoid about hypothetical slippery slopes that we end up being paralyzed when it comes to solving a crisis in the here and now. Just coz' a slope might be slippery doesn't mean the entire world should be covered in gravel
.
In the end, it's about a rational approach to
solving these problems - not merely
appearing to solve these problems through a lot of bluster and angry rhetoric (not referring to you this time). To (completely mis)quote Sir Humphrey Appleby
- the former is the act of a social reformer whose goal is humanity's survival into the next
century, the latter - the act of a politician who wishes to survive till next Friday.
Here's some more food for thought (apropos of nothing really - just more meandering
). We hear daily of people caught with child porn. That's fine - so they should be, and sentenced accordingly. But how many times do we hear of any
children saved from their horrible fate? Or of an actual
perpetrator (not merely consumer) being caught or his/her victims being rescued? Are the politicos doing anything at all towards
that end? Sure doesn't seem like it - because that's
difficult and expensive. It's much easier to make a whole lot of internet-based laws that
appear to be tough on such crimes. But are they really thinking of the children? It doesn't seem to be the case. All that seems to be happening is that these crimes are driven underground - out of sight, out of mind
. That is not to say that these internet laws are unnecessary - just that one should be very skeptical about what they actually accomplish and not labor under the delusion that they are saving actual children from anything.