EPTMan Fined for having Simpsons Pornography - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
| ||
|
onihunter
United States515 Posts
| ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
On December 12 2008 02:11 onihunter wrote: That's the equivalent of arresting anyone that has that hentai shit with children on the internet. I can't see any downside to that | ||
|
HamerD
United Kingdom1922 Posts
On December 11 2008 23:08 LonelyMargarita wrote: You can't outlaw something that might influence a small percentage of people to do something illegal. It's a slippery slope. I'm quite considerably against slippery slope arguments. I think you can make abstract any subjective concept to make it look unwise with them. Note that I am not against your opinion, because I am halfway between pro and against this idea; but I think the point is that setting paradigms and deciding the point at which something is too far is important. It's an all or nothing mentality which I am against. I would speculate that, because people are not brought up to consider children as sexual partners, most paedophiles will have to go through a sort of 'discovery' of their unusual sexual urges. This will, I assume, feature going through different levels of pornography and then onto real life. It's one for the research, and I don't have time to look through the academic papers. Suffice to say I don't think your point of view there is incontestable. General consensus is to keep marijuana levels to a minimum, because it is a gateway to harder stuff; and the law reflects this. It has been decided that marijuana is one step too far, but nicotine is not...the slippery slope is avoided because people set the line and don't go for an 'all or nothing' mentality...and I think it could be argued that the same should go for child pornography of any kind. | ||
|
BlackStar
Netherlands3029 Posts
If you download the stuff mentioned then you probably are in violation of the child porn rules. You risk being in jail for quite some time. I guess you are ok if the females all have huge breasts or something. [edit] Ok apparently they now have comparable rules after US pressure. In 1998, Japan was the world's biggest producer of child pornography and Parliament recently refused to pass a law banning the production of child pornography, citing "business reasons." Under American pressure, in 2003 the Japanese government updated its child pornography laws to match those of the west, however it failed to curtail the industry. Laugh all you want at that 'dumb judge' but he is just applying the current laws correctly. | ||
|
HamerD
United Kingdom1922 Posts
If not, technically any cartoon involving small people with underdeveloped bodies would not be paedophilia unless it were specified that their age were below 18 in the actual cartoon. Ofc it's different for characters from the simpsons. | ||
|
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
On December 11 2008 15:20 dronebabo wrote: what a dumb judge HAHAHA feel threatened????? | ||
|
ChaosSyndrome
Canada3 Posts
On December 12 2008 03:13 HamerD wrote: One other issue may be...is it wrong to be sexually attracted to the body features of children? I was thinking that if a guy wanted to marry that Shawn whatever her name was from the USA gymnastics, he would really have to have some sort of paedophilia gene in him. She looks identical to a child. There's a 20 year old girl in my house who used to be a gymnast and she gets ID'd for 16's at the cinema. She is tiny and flat chested...would her boyfriend be considered a paedophile? If not, technically any cartoon involving small people with underdeveloped bodies would not be paedophilia unless it were specified that their age were below 18 in the actual cartoon. Ofc it's different for characters from the simpsons but im interested in developing (intended) this. Stop trying to justify your lust for children, pervert. Go blow one on Lucy from Charlie Brown Christmas and leave us alone. | ||
|
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
| ||
|
HamerD
United Kingdom1922 Posts
On December 12 2008 03:17 ChaosSyndrome wrote: Stop trying to justify your lust for children, pervert. Go blow one on Lucy from Charlie Brown Christmas and leave us alone. I'd pay for you to go to comedy camp but it would bankrupt me to get you funny. Don't be absurd and kindly die. | ||
|
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
| ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
| ||
|
ChaosSyndrome
Canada3 Posts
On December 12 2008 03:20 HamerD wrote: I'd pay for you to go to comedy camp but it would bankrupt me to get you funny. Don't be absurd and kindly die. No surprise that you responded so quickly. Waiting for your Dakota Fanning up-skirt gifs to load? Pervert. You make me sick. + Show Spoiler + On July 04 2008 06:55 HamerD wrote: 1. I'm far more talented than you'll ever be at lots of things (I have no proof but I really, deeply expect so) 2. I'm far more funny than you'll ever be (around people who aren't stupid, whooping american seals at least). I am not entirely in tune with TL humour because it is far below the usual sort of humour of my friends, and it's hard to stoop 3. I'm attractive 4. I'm definitely more intelligent, philosophical, wise, well-read, charming and intellectual than you 5. I'm an exciting, enthusiastic person; with a lot of time for any charitable cause. I'm a passionate and emotional philanthrope. 6. I'm an elitist, and refuse to accept anything but the best 7. I have an incredibly eclectic range of things I enjoy, which is stimulating for people around me. I am always busy. From sports/ gym, to philosophy and politics, to gaming, to music, to academia and esoteric exploration; I do a lot of things which means I have a lot of interesting things to talk about. 8. I take life seriously...I have a lot of emotion and passion. I care about things, and I'm very protective and loyal of and to my friends. 9. I can fit more children in my van than you can | ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
On December 12 2008 03:21 HeadBangaa wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5KH9Z383hE dude DUDE not cool | ||
|
Xusneb
Canada612 Posts
On December 12 2008 03:21 HeadBangaa wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5KH9Z383hE I watched this like 3 times and I still dont know wtf is going on. | ||
|
qrs
United States3637 Posts
| ||
|
Sadist
United States7233 Posts
| ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
Lolicon is illegal in Sweden too btw. | ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
| ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
Even if watching violent movies made you slightly more likely to act violently I cant see a reason to ban it. Alcohol consumption makes people a lot more violent on average anyway. I don't think it should be possible for people to go to jail for what they draw or fiction they write or own. Its art and you don't censor art, you just don't. | ||
| ||
