Quote:
Originally Posted by carpetmojo
"..........well when its put in such black and white terms, i'm going to side with the child pornographers. i'm not saying it doesn't exist but i think its a massively overblown issue ............"
I'm sorry, but I feel that's about one of the saddest statements to make, if it means what I read it to mean.
First, how can anyone side with child pornographers, whatever civil
liberty or whatever, might be at threat ?
How can you equate the two for goodness sake........
And then to admit it goes on, and semi-excuse it by offering the suggestion that child pronography is massively overblown ?
What ?
Every single incidence on-screen represent at least one child betrayed by adults, taken advantage of, degraded, and their childhood stripped away for ever.
So, just what number of such incidences is OK, and therefore acceptable, and doesn't warrant trying to stop the practice - and what's the number where it becomes acceptable to attempt it ?
ONE is too many.
And just because it's difficult to do, does that mean it shouldn't be attempted ?
|
I don't approve of child pornography, nor do I approve of half-assed attempts to stop it, and attempts by all and sundry to wrap whatever half-baked scheme they've come up with in a "what about the children?' mantra.
You want to get serious about child pornography? One is too many? Fine.
Public castration for users.
Public flaying for the perpetrators.
That I'd vote for.