What makes it different?

What does Anthony Weiner have to do with this? He sent nude images of himself. Way different than CP by a mile.

There is no logical answer. It was driven by morality which is the opposite of logic

thank you. can the rest of you have a rational conversation about this or what?

You're acting like this is uncharted territory and not the millionth thread we've talked about it and reached near-consensus on.

what was the consensus? I don't browse Holla Forums daily, so I'm just curious

This guy probably just came here recently after hearing it was a free speech site. Unfortunately there's less free speech here than advertised. Still better than cuckchan though.

No, I knew about Holla Forums for a while, this is just something I had in my head that I have literally nowhere to talk about

...

They say there is more. he is part of pizzagate

does that mean CP is the only exception to the first amendment when it comes to possessing information and will be for the forseeable future?? what about bestiality? or people with disabilities? those have rights?

Wrong. He was caught sexting a minor for his latest act. Still hasn't been arrested after 6 months, though because he's a Clintonista.

Bestiality is actually illegal to possess, it's considered obscenity.

The first amendment is dead. Depending on your interpretation of history it may never have been alive to begin with. If the government doesn't like what you're saying or what you're putting on film, they'll find a reason to arrest you, or they'll use some other method of ruining your life. They've done it to every anti-war movement in American history because the government is run by corporate warmongers, and they're not about to refrain from that here.

wikileaks.org/wiki/An_insight_into_child_porn

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test

Obscenity is whatever the government says it is.

from wikipedia

Plus there's literally a bestiality thread on this board… So it still stands that CP is the only thing in the entire world which are illegal images. If it wasn't you would've seen it by accident. Is this the correct thing to do?

I kinda agree, but CP has some other reasons why it's illegal. Children are literally passed around as sex slaves, CP being legal would only make it seem more okay, when it obviously is not. Also, that is just a drawing, loli is legal. (mostly)

I think almost everyone here would agree that:
and then what's much more contested but most people would agree:

If people actually wanted pizza it's easy enough to find even on mainstream sites.

For fuck sake, you can go to motherless and find pizza within 15~30 seconds even if that's not what the site is used for. Some shit just slips by the moderators for years.

I always shake my fucking head at you squares that need scientific backing to see that looking at a certain type of porn, lusting after it enough to pull out your phallus and masturbate, ejaculate because you find the images that appealing yet claim that you wouldn't try it if the opportunity came and you could get away. That is such bullshit.

Whatevskies bruh.

So I can fuck my dog, but not her puppies?

Is there any proof that children are used as sex slaves any more than people use animals or senile old people? No. That's just the one that is more discussed.

Japan is has one of the lowest rape statistics, where loli is legal and cp possession was until 2014 (I'm serious). Plus, you can't judge peoples moral standard just by their sexual interests

The vast majority of CP is self-produced and distributed between minors and the government denies knowledge.

There's no reason why we can't return to 1970s standards when professionally, voluntarily produced child nudity was completely legal and sold in bookstores. Anything coerced would remain illegal.

The know-it-alls don't want that, because they feel that some things are "too good" for the masses to consume, like cocaine.

What would the difference of willingly looking at naked children in real life and looking at them online be? You would have to argue that undressing children in real life for your own visual pleasure is completely different than someone else doing it for you on the internet. It's the act of wanting to see children naked that is taboo and inappropriate behavior.

Just try to argue this with people in real life. I'm sure you know what happens. It's not so much of us convincing you why it's wrong, you have to convince the world it's alright. Good luck and be careful!

The difference is that people can think about children in their heads and no one would ever know, while the government has ways of tracking you online to enforce the law. Having a sexual preference isn't illegal. But it still means that all the sick shit is available online as long as its not little girls showing their butt or something…

I'm happy for you and I'ma let you finish, but I think you should all know that Milo did nothing wrong.

Children need their innocence so they can grow up healthy and sane.
If we let pedos, queers and other preverts, pederasts get ahold of children all we are doing is creating another, much larger generation of pedos, queers, perverts, and pederasts.

Japan just has the lowest prosecution rate for rape because their definition of rape is different. They're just moving the goalposts, redefining rape.

t. feminist

I'm not a moralfag, this is just my best attempt at a thesis

Porn is incredibly in-demand and profitable, it's a multi billion dollar industry in the US alone. Gore and other random shock videos on the internet are not much in demand or profitable.

Imagine if possession of meth were legal. People would be selling it left and right and the only way to get caught would be if the cops happened to see you the moment cash changed hands. It would be a monumental task to enforce. CP is like meth, it's in high demand and if possession were legal the number of people willing to pay for it would increase drastically, and therefore so would the number of people willing to produce it.

Remember, we're not arguing whether CP is "bad" or not, only why it's treated differently from other "bad" things by our society

...

To expand on this further…

There's literally nothing morally wrong with:

There's literally nothing morally wrong with:

But if those things were legal the demand would be tremendously higher, which would have moral consequences.

1. people do pay for porn

2. even the free sites get paid through adverts from millions of clickthroughs

Please put a stop to such pure unadulterated filthy cutness, disgustingly-vile lovely youthful sweetness, along with degenerate displays of adorable joyful innocence!