Your View on Child Porn

[Fluffy]

As for comp files. If they say how to commit a murder, and you're the suspect in a murder where the killing matches that of the files, then yes, they're evidence. Same thing if you're on trial for molestation, and they find kiddie porn, your ship is sunk.

Yeah, we've already established that. You said it in your last post and I agreed. They can show that a person is quite likely guilty. But the files can in no way be proven to have caused the person to commit the crime. That is all I'm saying.

You tell me why a 10 year old can't get a tattoo, and I'll tell you why that same kid can't legally enter a relationship with an adult.

Because arbitrary laws say they can't. I'm quite well aware of why.

However, with "normal" people, you never hear that a child is attractive.

Yeah, because most people are just dying to tell you that a kid is attractive. I believe there are studies somewhere out there that estimate that at least 20% of people find them attractive on some level. Not preference for them, but simply find them attractive. I honestly dislike looking stuff up and never remember its location, but I do recall a credible study.

Also, Koda tells you exactly why she thinks illustrated porn and relationships should be illegal. She was a victim, is a mother and knows both victims and sex abusers. She has enough experience in her life to know what she feels is right for both her and for her family.

If that's all there is to it then there's nothing to be discussed. This is not a reason to make things illegal. Would you disagree?

On top of that, children's minds and physical bodies aren't sexually wired yet. Rather, the equipment might be there, but the current isn't running through those wires yet. Having sex with a child would have to be a one sided deal, in which only the adult got pleasure. A, you're not even of comparable size, so it would probably cause immense pain, and B, the child's body isn't primed for that yet; nerve endings and the desire aren't even there yet.

Quite simply, wrong. I'm not sure how you came to this conclusion. First of all, the claim that the nerve endings aren't there is just ridiculous. They are there from before birth, and they are quite capable of feeling the same types of pleasure as an adult. The desire can also be present. It's not that uncommon. Therefore, your claim that it would have to be a one sided deal is clearly flawed. Size also has nothing to do with causing pain. You're jumping to conclusions here. A sexual encounter need not include coitus, which is the only case in which size would be a problem.

Chez also brings up a good point. If you weren't a pedophile, would you be making the same argument? Personally, it seems that you are trying to justify your own beliefs by tackling the law.

No, she doesn't bring up a good point. Why I'm making my argument does not matter. The argument is independent of my reason why. Would it be any different if I wasn't a pedophile and was making the same argument? No. The argument would still be the same. Why I make it is irrelevant.

To answer your question, though, yes, I'd still be making the same argument. I like our freedom of speech. I would defend it no matter what the material in question was. The thing about freedom of speech is that sometimes you won't like what's being said. If we start making things illegal because someone doesn't like it, then we could potentially make everything illegal and just forget about freedom. For every thing out there, there is probably someone who doesn't like it.

And when it comes to children, I believe they deserve the same rights as everyone else. This is not a view held only by pedophiles.