There is absolutely no objective test for quantifying what is "obscene", and such laws have been endlessly abused in the past to ban everything from Lady Chatterley's Lover to Ulysses. As far as the "normalization" argument goes, that's the exact same justification used to criminalize "hate speech", Holocaust denial, and so forth. We should never trust the government with deciding what kinds of speech are too dangerous to be heard.
No it doesn't, the first amendment exists to preserve people's right to criticize the government and hold them accountable. Also, morality overules the constitution, at least for people with a moral compass. If you want to die on the hill of defending loli, then knock yourself out.
What is this UNC talking about chill out and hit this froot aproved galaxy gass nigga
You should always be sceptical of any law that claims to fight pedos since that’s a convenient way to make it taboo to oppose surveillance or attacks on freedom, but I don’t really see how this law could be used to attack anyone innocent. As far as I can tell it only bans drawings of characters that appear to be kids.
you have a point
No, retard, morality does not overrule the First Amendment. That's why the Westboro Baptist Church is allowed to picket the funerals of mass shooting victims, and that's why neo-Nazis were allowed to march through Skokie. You have absolutely no idea what you are even talking about.
On your first point, you're exactly right. Attempts to chip away at civil liberties are always done in the name of fighting some social ill so that anyone who opposes the attack on civil liberties can be painted as supporting said social ill.
I'm talking about morals, of course you don't get it. The constitution means nothing to me if I and my principals decide it's invalid.
Obscenity law has been upheld by the supreme court before. I do agree with your point with normalization, that was my emotional response. I don't think the jap loli/shota drawings should be freely available to anyone, much like I don't think heroin should be available to anyone.
I think he's afraid that if it becomes the norm, the government can use this as a ramp to ban other expression and speech as long as they can get the majority of whatever generation is in power to agree with it.
Extremely rare trvke
The constitution exists precisely to prevent people like you from taking away our civil liberties based on your own arbitrary and capricious definitions of petty morality. Thankfully, you don't have any power to overrule the constitution.
It has been upheld before, but it also been endlessly abused before. Obscenity laws were primarily used for banning books, many of which would later be regarded as literary masterpieces.
Its the one time where my OCD benefits me. Cant imagine being some nasty motherfucker who gets jizz on electronics. Also I'd rather not have any network packets going out indicating I'm cranking my hog. That's how I compartmentalize it.
Not calling @MoonMetropolis a pedo in this btw
You're acting like subjective morality exists, it doesn't.
The main thing I got from that video is that I shouldn’t argue about american law. Here in sweden we’ve had similar legislation for a long time without anything like that happening. The idea of criminalizing south park episodes would also be unthinkable here. I don’t know what it’s like to live in a puritan country like america and will avoid arguing about it in the future. I apologise for wasting your time.
>OCD? Isn't that like the Oozy Corn Dog combo at Costco or something?
>BUT CP IS FREEZE PEACH
