It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
but by not censoring child porn you are opening the gates to propagate violence and abuse of children !
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: uncommitted
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: bobs_uruncle
She said child porn is vile.
Describing child pornography as "illegal" and "vile", Ms Fox said: “This is not about defending child porn this is about fighting censorship and fighting for free speech.
If you defend the right of people to watch child pornography which by definition is rape and abuse as the child isn't of an age of consent, then ultimately you are condoning to some level the abuse taking place in the first place, even if you are too shallow to consider that. Weird notion? Not really.
a reply to: sapien82
I see her saying child porn is both illegal and vile. Can you point to where she said it should be legal?
originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: sapien82
Is it possible that this person is a plant to make everything Brexit look very, very bad?
originally posted by: sapien82
...is basically saying its ok to propagate the suffering of children online
because we should be allowed to view, graphically horrible images because its our right to do so !
originally posted by: DJMSN
People are afraid of losing core rights in what the HCLW will later necessary to control the other. It's why some Americans are so crazy about gun rights, they change something small and it doesn't work, they dont stop until everything is gone, all under the guise of stopping something else.
originally posted by: EvillerBob
originally posted by: DJMSN
People are afraid of losing core rights in what the HCLW will later necessary to control the other. It's why some Americans are so crazy about gun rights, they change something small and it doesn't work, they dont stop until everything is gone, all under the guise of stopping something else.
Exactly this.
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Thing is, that's not a gun issue, that an elected stupid people problem. You want to get to the crux of the issue stop electing stupid people...
originally posted by: EvillerBob
originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
Thing is, that's not a gun issue, that an elected stupid people problem. You want to get to the crux of the issue stop electing stupid people...
If they were smart enough to be worth electing, they wouldn't be stupid enough to be running for election.
Politics is the short bus for the folks who aren't smart enough to get there on their own.
originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: Freeborn
I think this is how we perpetuate the circle of abuse though ,
most people who abuse are or where victims of abuse when they were young
so if we only seek to punish then we really never address the issue of why this happens
I think by studying the rehabilitation of these people , through psychology and physiological examination of their brains
and the use of psychedelics we can remap their neural networks and prevent them from causing further damage
but at the same time understand how this can happen in humans
it could lead to some new treatments for those who have suffered abuse !
and if its the case where we do punish them but not rehabilitate them , how about we ask them if they would be willing to take part in these studies on their brains and find out the cause , especially if they are lifers or on death row !
These people cant be fixed "YET" because we lack the medical understanding and the medical technology to fix them!
or are we simply just unwilling to research this because of its taboo subject nature ?
We shy away from us as its a collective shame on our species
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
I also want to point out the Brexit Party most certainly never said this, a member of the party said something, which seems to be taken out of context at least to some extent.
I don't know this person at all, but this is an intellectually dishonest post.