Cyclone Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 Your logic is so warped it's pretty impressive. YOU said that you'd leave child porn available. That IS aiding and abetting. Because (in the context of this discussion) you CAN do something about it. You also claim that imprisoning people for creating that content isn't a form of censorship, a ridiculous assertion. Your two statements together make no sense. On the one hand you support censorship whilst claiming not to, but on the other you refuse to remove material that is extremely harmful in the name of not censoring the internet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommo68 Posted May 8, 2015 Author Share Posted May 8, 2015 Your logic is so warped it's pretty impressive. YOU said that you'd leave child porn available. That IS aiding and abetting. Because (in the context of this discussion) you CAN do something about it. You also claim that imprisoning people for creating that content isn't a form of censorship, a ridiculous assertion. Your two statements together make no sense. On the one hand you support censorship whilst claiming not to, but on the other you refuse to remove material that is extremely harmful in the name of not censoring the internet... My logic is warped!!! Doing nothing is not aiding abetting when you not ia position to act. I was not withdrawig anyone's content I was suggesting we jail the people who create kiddie porn. Only pedos wil disagree with that Cyclone. But yes I would refuse to remove material because that would be censorship, which apart from in exeptional circumstances I do not agree with. I tire of explaining to you ..so on this topic you and I will just have to agree to differ I made my point, any intelligent person that wants to can see it... . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 8, 2015 Share Posted May 8, 2015 But yes I would refuse to remove material because that would be censorship, which apart from in exeptional circumstances I do not agree with. For the sake of argument let's say we agree that 'using' victims' or replications of victims is a go, what in your estimation is "exceptional circumstances"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 My logic is warped!!! Doing nothing is not aiding abetting when you not ia position to act. In this hypothetical discussion, we are in a position, hypothetically, to act. Nobody is talking about you personal arresting and imprisoning people and then removing material from the internet. We're talking about what SHOULD be done. And you're saying that the material should NOT be removed. I was not withdrawig anyone's content I was suggesting we jail the people who create kiddie porn. Only pedos wil disagree with that Cyclone. Everyone disagrees with that, the material should be removed in addition to the prosecutions. Only an idiot would disagree with that. But yes I would refuse to remove material because that would be censorship, which apart from in exeptional circumstances I do not agree with. Except that you do, because the threat of jail for creating material IS censorship. I tire of explaining to you ..so on this topic you and I will just have to agree to differ I made my point, any intelligent person that wants to can see it... . . You have made your point, and you've also made clear that you don't really understand what censorship is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now