As much as I hate pedofiles...

**Greyblades** · 05-16-2012, 19:04

I'm not sure about standards, but I'd walk up to whichever bastard I find who claims he created all life for his "divine" plan and bitch-slap him for making someone that could want to do something so despicable. To have a soul tainted with an uncontrolable urge to destroy a life and make them think it was what they wanted.
After that it's speculation on the afterlife.

**HoreTore** · 05-16-2012, 23:24

Child Abuse Photos, or what is mistakenly called "child porn", is illegal because it is made by an illegal act, the abuse of children. Among the reasons for it is that spreading it adds insult to the victim and the demand for it creates more abuse.

If no abuse of children has taken place, there is nothing illegal going on. We do not legislate "immorality".

**spankythehippo** · 05-17-2012, 01:16

This case happened in Australia a couple of years ago. But it wasn't drawings. It was actual photographs.

http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opin...803-115dg.html

http://www.smh.com.au/national/artis...0111-m2s5.html

By the literal definition of porn, it is any text (be it pictures, videos, novels, whatever) that arouses sexual excitement. So, by that logic, a person might be sexually aroused by Rime of The Ancient Mariner. Is that considered porn?

**ICantSpellDawg** · 05-17-2012, 01:24

Originally Posted by spankythehippo

This case happened in Australia a couple of years ago. But it wasn't drawings. It was actual photographs.

http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opin...803-115dg.html

http://www.smh.com.au/national/artis...0111-m2s5.html

By the literal definition of porn, it is any text (be it pictures, videos, novels, whatever) that arouses sexual excitement. So, by that logic, a person might be sexually aroused by Rime of The Ancient Mariner. Is that considered porn?

Ha. I've got a hot site for you. Warning, it may not be appropriate for work, what with cylinders entering into greased plugs and electricity coursing through throbbing transistors. Hang on... I've gotta spurt.

**Greyblades** · 05-17-2012, 01:26

Hang on... I've gotta spurt.

They have a pill for that now.

**spankythehippo** · 05-17-2012, 01:33

Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg

Ha. I've got a hot site for you. Warning, it may not be appropriate for work, what with cylinders entering into greased plugs and electricity coursing through throbbing transistors. Hang on... I've gotta spurt.

Mini me is throbbing from the PC & Video game section of that site.

Better finish off with this site.

http://www.trollandtoad.com/

UNLEASH THE INNER GEEK!

**Major Robert Dump** · 05-17-2012, 03:44

You people advocating for the banning of cartoons in which there is no real victim are treading on a very slippery slope. Yes, yes, "for the children" got that, blah blah, carry on.

Pretend child porn is oodles and oodles better than real child porn, as there are no victims. What gets me about this thread are several of the people wanting to ban the cartoons are also th same ones who wanted to ban porn in general, where at least you could argue -- indirectly in most cases -- that there was a victim. There is no victim here. If we are saying a pado will use the cartoons to groom a child then that is an entirely different law violation altogether. If we are saying that viewing the cartoon makes them more likley to commit the act (a worn out, disproven argument along the lines of the marijuana-is-a-gateway-drug argument) then now we are dealing with intangibles and what-ifs and, as already stated, a very slippery slope, and it would be pretty hypocritical to levy such an argument but not also weigh the possibility that this product staves people off from becoming predators because they can act on their impulses without involving actual children.

I think the whole issue is pretty disturbing and disgusting... but bannin frikkin cartoons?... just wow. The way I see certain facts, figures and realities brushed under the rug in the USA, where one becomes an "ist" for stating certain opinions, I can totally see something like this breeding over into the political realm with politcal cartoons being banned because they incite hatred, which anymore simply means you offended someone

**lars573** · 05-19-2012, 07:46

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

Pretend child porn is oodles and oodles better than real child porn, as there are no victims. What gets me about this thread are several of the people wanting to ban the cartoons are also th same ones who wanted to ban porn in general, where at least you could argue -- indirectly in most cases -- that there was a victim. There is no victim here. If we are saying a pado will use the cartoons to groom a child then that is an entirely different law violation altogether. If we are saying that viewing the cartoon makes them more likley to commit the act (a worn out, disproven argument along the lines of the marijuana-is-a-gateway-drug argument) then now we are dealing with intangibles and what-ifs and, as already stated, a very slippery slope, and it would be pretty hypocritical to levy such an argument but not also weigh the possibility that this product staves people off from becoming predators because they can act on their impulses without involving actual children.

Oh there is a victim alright. The person what comes across this lolicon (yes there is a enough volume of pedobear approved Hentai it has a name) stuff whilst looking for some other filthy degenerate drawings. People like me.

pomfers gonna pomf

**Greyblades** · 05-19-2012, 08:37

Bah, finding things that offend you is just part and parcel of browsing the internet, if we banned everything that offended people we'd have very little left. Suck it up and press the page back button, ya wuss.