Liberal rhetoric can be used to justify child pornography

File: 435.jpg (88KB, 717x880px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 717x880px

>>134827137
Woah, NO ONE here possible came up with that before!

Drugs do no harm if handled correctly. If you buy them off of some nigger on the street, god knows what he laced it with.
There's no such benefit for child pornography. Your allusion isn't valid.

File: 1499947682268.jpg (195KB, 600x585px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 600x585px

>>134827137
Children are still hurt by it retard.

slide thread

>>134827353
>drugs do no harm
Fuck off and nuke germany.
>>134827390
The user hurts themselves when they use drugs. And children are not always hurt.

>>134827353
>Drugs do no harm if handled correctly. If you buy them off of some nigger on the street, god knows what he laced it with.

Child pornography does not harm if handled correctly. If you buy them off of some nigger on the street, god knows on what he filmed it.

>Daily reminder that arguments with no substance can be repurposed to serve any point

File: 1500610031432.jpg (83KB, 684x856px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 684x856px

>>134827669
ok retard

File: 1499255244254.jpg (108KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 500x500px

>>134827789
>not an arguement

>>134827669
>>134827769
>reading comprehension
If you make it so drugs are only made available to you after thorough medical checks, they will not do any harm if taken at a healthy dosage. You know nothing about pharmaceuticals.

File: 1500543418216.jpg (66KB, 447x447px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 447x447px

>>134827839
hard to produce an argument in response to retarded drivel

File: 1499016022034.png (347KB, 514x530px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 514x530px

>>134827933
>hurr durr

>>134827918
If you make it so child pornography is only made available to you after thorough psycholoical tests, they will not do any harm if taken at a healthy dosage.

If you make it so that child porn actors have to go through thorough medical checks and sign consent, then they will not suffer any harm if they act in a safe environment.

>Daily reminder that arguments with no substance can be reporpused to serve any point of view

>>134828143
Literally apples and oranges you utter retard.

File: images.jpg (5KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 225x225px

>>134828143
>If you make it so that child porn actors have to go through thorough medical checks and sign consent, then they will not suffer any harm if they act in a safe environment.
So essentially you make fucking children legal?

Not surprised you're reppin that autism flag tbqh Milo

>>134828390
>So essentially you make fucking children legal?

No, I do not support the statement I made. I am simply mirroring your statement.

I am using all the arguments you use for legalizing marijuana and showing you how they are completely equivalent to an argument for legalizing child pornography.

It is literally the same thing. Read my post again, notice that it is the same structure of your post but I simply changed the topic of the argument from weed to child porn.

Huge eye roll on that whole thing op. The difference is that one is a victimless cash crop that could put tons of working class adults to work while emptying prisons of non violent offenders and providing massive taxes for the states and has already been found nearly impossible to prohibit while the other is a fetish frowned on by 99.9% of the public and is therefore hugely enforceable while literally victimizing minors.
I'll let you guess which is which.

>>134828580
>I am simply mirroring your statement.
I haven't made an argument in favor of illicit drug legalization.

You however have made the argument that it should be legal to fuck children, despite your assertion otherwise.

You can't sign an "illegal contract", it is non binding, so either in the scenario you presented fucking children is perfectly legal or your scenario is retarded.

>>134828749
Huge eye roll on that post. The difference is that one is a victimless cash film industry that could put tons of working class adults and young adults to work while emptying prisons of non violent offenders and providing massive taxes for the states and has already been found nearly impossible to prohibit while the other is a degenerate drug frowned on by 90% of the congress and is therefore hugely enforceable while literally victimizing minors who don't know any better.

>>134829211
Huge eye roll on that post. The difference is that one is a victimless cash fetish used primarily by nonviolent members of congress, and the other is a massive degenerate adulterant used to sway 90% of the congress and is therefore yugely endoforceable while literally putting tons of victimized minors into prohibition.

File: 1500590202416.jpg (29KB, 471x414px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 471x414px

>134827137
>Implying that most of the (((liberals))) aren't secretly hoping to finally start pushing hard for that
I still can't understand how evil and sick one must be to even be able to justify or thinking about doing carnal acts with a child.

>>134829211
>That truly abhorrent post
>That truly abhorrent flag
If s ever truly does htf you will be very wise to hole away with the other faggots and liberals, surely I'm not the only one who will be shooting your kind on sight.

File: ShillsExposed.gif (689KB, 1688x2849px) Image search: [Google]

689KB, 1688x2849px

>>134827137

[Pic Related] is the Shill Operation being done against the KB Threads/Comments.

It was started on 6/2 & then on 6/3 the London Bridge Attack happened. The Shills had foreknowledge about the Terror Attack due to them being part of the same ISIS Network (That also did the Manchester & Westminster Attacks), which is why they did/started the Shill Operation a day before in hopes of discrediting the KB Threads ahead of time.

Bilderberg (which was going on during that Timeframe), IC “fingerprints” & those in CNN familiar with Doxing were also involved. CNN eventually made a deal with ISIS to hire that ISIS Filmmaker if they Doxed that Trump GIF Sharer for them. The exact same tactic of “doxing a random person (who then deletes accounts after seeing/finding out about the dox) in hopes to use that person’s information to attack someone/something else” was done in both cases. (The Shills really went “all in” after a Red Herring, showing desperation & paranoia)

The Shills put “Deep Drive” CP into the “Frank Memes/Images/Pics” they tend to post. It’s called “Deep Drive” CP because it’s still in the computer(s) even if the images are deleted & special/advanced tech/hardware/security systems are required to spot/detect it. (This type of CP is predominately used for Blackmail & Compromising. CP Distributors have access to it)

“Deep Drive” CP is how they are going to bring down 4chan (Hiro & Moderators take note) by “Poisoning the Well” with images/memes that have it. Pedophile Operatives inside Governments/Agencies/Military’s will use it to Compromise everyone (“Good Guys” & “Bad Guys”, Pedo’s are Evil that will spare no one) unless they are stopped beforehand.

They will also try to start War(while also killing Trump’s admin as “revenge” for taking down the Pedo Networks) by say “Russia” put the CP on/in the computers. Pedo’s will use the confusion to hide, escape and/or claim “innocence”.

How cute you look believing that the war on drugs isnt a fucking failure

>>134831044
>mexico talking about the war of drugs

Lol okay Paco.

>We haven't won the war on drugs so we should just stop fighting
OK, what about the war on poverty?

>>134827390
WHAT IF THE CHILD CONSENTS?
Seriously, they can already consent to mutilating their own genitals, so why not pornography/sex?

>>134831325
Children can't consent.

>>134831175
Last time I checked it wasnt mexico who started this nonesense

I see this thread has taken a turn for the worse.

I just want to remind everyone that I am NOT arguing for child pornography. Child porn is a hideous act.

What I am pointing out is how arguments to legalize drugs can be easily repurposed to argue for the legalization of rape and child pornography.

>>134831191
war on poverty doesnt create a big ass black market

File: unclepaul.jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>134827137
Suuuuuuuure

>>134831416
Yeah, Taco Bell Enchilada ARRIBA ARRIBA ARRIBA empanada to you too

File: 726262672.jpg (73KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 480x360px

>>134828749
>>134829211
>>134829739
Huge eye roll on that post. The difference is that one is a copy pasta industry that could put tons of working class adults and young adults to work while emptying prisons of non violent offenders and providing massive taxes for the states and has already been found nearly impossible to prohibit while the other is a degenerate meme frowned on by 90% of the congress and is therefore hugely enforceable while literally victimizing minors who don't know any better.

>>134831561
I love enchiladas but I prefer chilaquiles. Taco bell is shit and american

>>134831734
>chilaquiles

SORRY. NO HABLA ESPAÑOL
NO HABLA ESPAÑOL

>>134831844
Understood. You only speak mcdonalds

>>134831979
NO HABLA ESPAÑOL NO HABLA ESPAÑOL

Syke, si hablo español mamahuevo. Mexicano conchetumadre, anda a comer tacos de mierda mamahuevo

>>134827918
And you know nothing about drugs you dumb faggot. Heroin will wreck you illegal or not. You will have no interest in hobbies, friends, family or women. You will stay in your shit apartment for the rest of your life in chemical bliss.

>>134832142
Gracias por dejarme en claro que eres o un sudaca o un centroamerichango, no vale la pena responderte.

>>134831044
how is it a failure?
They sell drugs and make money
jail minor offenders and make money
use drugs as an excuse to invade foreign countries and make money

They have been winning the war on drugs since the start. The rest of us are the ones losing.

>>134832293
NO SPEAKO ESPAÑOL. TACO CHALUPA ENCHILADA

>>134832206
>You will have no interest in women

Shit where do I sign up?

>>134827137
You are a moron
>>134827769
>Child pornography does not harm if handled correctly.
>>134828143
> they will not do any harm if taken at a healthy dosage.

CP is inherently harmful. You are acting like the only person who could be harmed is the viewer. fuck off retard

>>134832454
Nearest hood, was gonna say the darknet but the 2 biggest ones just shut down and a bunch of vendors are under LE control so I'd wait a few months for things to settle there.

>>134832308
>america consumes 70% of drugs worldwide and has one of the largest prison population
>cartels killing each other in mexico to supply their demand
Is that your success?

>>134832900
Its a success for certain people, i.e. people behind privately run prisons in America. For the average person its a failure and certainly a disaster for Mexico

>>134827137
youre a retard

No, the government has no right to tell us what we can or cant do to our bodies. Doing drugs we only cause harm to ourself. It does not harm anyone else. If you get high and take actions that do cause harm to others, theres already laws in place against that for everything you can imagine going wrong. So it comes down to taking away freedom of choice. Where as the other inflicts harm upon others; innocents that are not even old enough to give consent or make decisions for themselves. Messing with children is a redline, people that wanna get high and ruin their lives and their bodies is their own choice. Not my place to judge but we dont need to waste time and resources on it either. But we shouldnt have to pay for their welfare or healthcare.

>>134827137
there are no victims in legal drug sales you moron

>>134827137

Dude you're making this post as a sort of veiled way to advocate for child porn, freak. It's really easy to tell your intention here

>>134827137
marijuana requires you to grow a plant to produce it
child pornography requires you to rape a toddler to produce it
stupid frog poster

>>134833228
>innocents that are not even old enough to give consent

*I stress that I do not endorse child porn, I am merely pointing out how arguments used to support marijuana can be used to support child porn*

Let me tell you something. We all know the numbers: 16,17,18,21, etc. Different places call these the age of consent. But why?

Can you link me to one scientific study that says "Humans are able to give consent at 18" or perhaps at 16 or 19? Is there any scientific basis for the age of consent?

Let me save you 5 minutes of google searching: WRONG.

The age of consent has no scientific basis and if you look around the globe, the age of consent of each country seems pretty much arbitrary. What science supports is that humans are completely developed by age 25, so perhaps the age of consent should be 25. But it isn't.

The "children aren't able to give consent" argument is stupid, because the age of consent is unscientific, fake news.

So now going to back to the comparison to marijuana and child porn. What if I got me a kid who says "I wanna be a porn actor, let me fuck some old guy for money. I agree."

Should that be legal then? Would you say that such an act should be legal?

I say no! And neither should marijuana be legal. You say "victimless act". But I say "Degeneracy".

>>134833386
wrong!
pedophilia requires you to make a child and grow it. same shit, different species

>>134833567
fuck off retard

>>134833961
Glad to know that you accept that I am right and that supporting drugs is the same as supporting child pornography.

At least you are honest with yourself.

>>134833567
A childs brain isnt fully developed, thats why, at least in america, a person is considered a minor until 18 and not legally allowed to give consent consentto almost anything. Thats why child porn is wrong. Five minutes of gooogle searching will pull up tons of evidence to support that. Hell, in some cases it takes longer than that to reach maturity.

I have a pending ban for reporting pedophile shit. CP on /tv/ will go unreported tonight
DONT LET THE PEDOS WIN FFS


>>>/tv/85417910
>>>/tv/85416676
>>>/tv/85418387
>>>/tv/85415591
>>>/tv/85413819
>>>/tv/85415061

>>134827918
children also being availible to you after medical checks will also do no harm at a healthy dosage.

Your reading comprehension is zero kraut.

>>134834128
>A childs brain isnt fully developed

Science supports that the human brain is not fully developed until the age of 25. So technically, 18 year old brains are not fully deveoped. But you agree to 18 year olds doing porn.

So you are saying you are a child rapist?

>>134832558
>>134828390
>>134828292

>lol liberal arguments work for stupid shit too
>NO THEY DON'T FUCK OFF RETARD

calm down shills

>>134834129
Are you new to /tv/? Thats pretty fucking standard over there. Also none of that is CP

>>134834329
>strawman

One more

>>>/tv/85418448

Remember, cross linking from a SFW board is too extreme for a board like /pol/

>>134834385
I didn't say it was cp, they wait for the mods to go offline in the early hours, that's when they spam cp in those threads

>>134834280
I'm saying that there is a huge difference between harming others and causing harm to yourself. At most your argument only makes me think maybe the age of consent should be raised to 25. Not that we need more laws and more government telling us what to do.

>>134835091
>At most your argument only makes me think maybe the age of consent should be raised to 25.

It definitely should, but society is already run by pedos like you so there is nothing to be done about that. I just like pointing out the hypocrisy of mainstream society who criminalize and demonize people with the age of consent when in reality the age of consent literally means nothing scientifically.

>I'm saying that there is a huge difference between harming others and causing harm to yourself.

And I am saying that technically a child pornography industry could pop up where no kids in harm. Kids are instead treated like actors. They sign contracts, they take medical tests and they reap the benefits of their act.

If you agree that marijuana should be legal, then such a child porn industry should also be legal because, as you people say, it is a "victimless act".

File: download.jpg (5KB, 223x226px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 223x226px

>>134827137
wew thats gotta be the most retarded thing i've read today

>>134835301
>And I am saying that technically a child pornography industry could pop up where no kids in harm. Kids are instead treated like actors. They sign contracts, they take medical tests and they reap the benefits of their act.
You can't sign a contract and make an illegal action into a legal one you fucking spastic. You're "technically" is just you talking shit mate.

>>134827137
the easiest way: fucking a child is wrong because it immediately involves another person who may or may not be able to consent. as a responsible citizen that is not okay, you should understand that the variables that this will create will undoubtedly steer more toward the negative. rocking the ganj: you smoke a plant. that it is chip. fucking a child or burning some pepper. that is the point you are trying to make. you are bad at things like this.

>>134834385
>>134834708
I'm about to be banned so I might as well post while I still can. Some of that deleted shit was child nudity though, which is defineately not normal on a fucking sfw television board, and when one autist requires a bot spamming his nonsense shit 24/7, it's not really "standard" then is it? He requires the bot to make it appear standard, despite the reality.

>>134835697
Isn't child rape and child porn rampant in hollywood circles? I think /tv/ is just a reflection of that.

>>134835301
You people? You cuckservatives need us libertarians or youre literally over run by the liberals. You need as many allies as you can get. And pedophilia isnt some arbitrary idea. Its pretty fucking black and white. My morals are absolute. Youre the one that doesnt sound so sure.

>>134835996
Okay Mr. my morals are absolute.

Tell me, scientifically, how do you distinguish between a 17 year old girl and an 18 year old girl?

>>134831472

>What I am pointing out is how arguments to legalize drugs can be easily repurposed to argue for the legalization of rape and child pornography.

Yes and people in this thread are now explaining to you why no one would actually buy this kind of retarded argument when it comes to child pronography. You have something to learn from this thread if you pay attention.

>>134836525
Date of birth?

Will you address the point I made twice about your inane argument?

File: 1496590907787.jpg (45KB, 630x430px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 630x430px

>This thread
Why can't people reading comprehension.
This is NOT about making child pornography legal, is about how the arguments for drugs could be potentially used in favour of child pornography in the future, a near future that is already starting if you potheads haven't realized.

DAN SCHNEIDER DIDNT DO ANYTHING STOP SLANDERING HIS NAME!

File: 1500717675657.jpg (47KB, 599x595px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 599x595px

>>134837017
Oh we can comprehend the analogy, it's just stupid.

>>134827137
comparing marijuana to child rape come on kekistan bro

>>134837246
>Comparing Marijuana to child rape
Come on Ancap bro

>it's another false equivalence episode

File: fbi tip.jpg (83KB, 1192x333px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 1192x333px

>>134827137

>>134837120
>Not all paedophiles are bad people - we need to have a sense of proportion ...
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/not-all-paedophiles-are-bad-people-we-need-to-have-a-sense-of-proportion-a6704201.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3244065/I-m-pedophile-not-monster-Man-writes-confronting-essay-asking-Americans-understand-different-pedophiles-child-molesters.html
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/08/opinion/mcpherson-pedophiles/index.html
This arguments aren't stupid, it's really reasonable to believe that in a society where this kind of behaviour is legal they would probably be a working class member of a functional child pornography company.

>>134837991

>http://independent co uk/voices/not-all-paedophiles-are-bad-people-we-need-to-have-a-sense-of-proportion-a6704201.html
https://archive.is/OE1UX
>http://cnn com/2011/11/08/opinion/mcpherson-pedophiles/index.html
https://archive.is/L9tvw

>>134838031
Kill yourself

>>134838031
You're a fucking god, sorry, dumb phone posting.

>>134837991
>if their actions weren't illegal it would be reasonable to assume they wouldn't be at odds with the law
really balls my melon

>>134838162
Glad to see you agree with me

File: 147582693.jpg (38KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 480x480px

>>134827137
Child Prostitution is lawful in LA...

>>134838031
>>134838110
Don't listen to him, you're great

>>134836525

You're right, you can't scientifically tell the difference. And to add to the confusion some people mature faster/slower than others. However, most rational people that don't want to harm kids would agree that having sex with kids is really fucked up. So how do you determine what's right and what's wrong? You gather all the available research, get a group of really smart people together and agree on a reasonable age of consent. One where the majority (by the way, that's the other term for it, age of majority) of people have developed enough to no longer be considered a child. And of course it's not a perfect system, but having sex with children is wrong.... So it's a pretty damned good compromise. Maybe that changes as more research becomes available. Because, as you so rightly pointed out, there is no scientific way to measure. But it is a socially agreed upon standard that people who are not child rapist care about. This is common sense for most of us. You're starting to worry me, buddy.

>>134838472
DAN IS INNOCENT ITS ILLEGAL TO SLANDER PEOPLE SO STOP IT OKAY

>>134838278
Yeah, however I don't agree that

>GROWING A PLANT
and
>FUCKING LITTLE CHILDREN
are the same think you disgusting miscreant

>>134838474
i hate when faggots reply to it and defend it that only kills threads faster

>>134838641
>Destroying your body
And
>Making profit off a consenting individual
No they aren't.

>>134838767
It's a shitty thread anyway

>>134838807
>consenting individual
>child
Why did you swap to your phone anyway OP?

You can do this with almost any ideology fucktard.

>>134827137
Smoking weed is a free choice and only effects the consumer, massively false equivalency.

File: 1336049452932[1].jpg (16KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 320x240px

>>134827137
>Liberal rhetoric can be used to justify....
It can be used to justify anything. Literally anything. That's the whole point of the left these days, to justify every fucking vice that has haunted mankind since it's beginning. As well as a few new ones not even God could have foreseen.

>>134838883
>Kids can choose their gender
>Kids can mutilate their penises
>Kids can't consent
Also, not op, but I do believe Marijuana should be legalised. But better regulated, just like alcohol or tabacco, everyone should be able to poison their body, but also know that they're in fact, poisoning their bodies. I've seen underages smoke weed in the middle of a campus in Highschool a and they don't get shit for it, it's disgusting and it should be illegal to sell or promote it to underages.

>>134839328
>>Kids can choose their gender
>>Kids can mutilate their penises
You believe this? It might explain your retarded assertions so far.

>>134839057
Fucking consenting kids is a free choice and only affects the participants. Great equivalency.

>>134839576
A child can't consent you idiot

>>134839440
Don't know how it works in that god forsaken island, but in America boys that one day wake up and feel like being a girl can convince their parents into mutilating their sexes.

>>134839825
>convince their parents
You mean legal guardian? Because children can't actually just unilaterally begin HRT?

Wow it's almost like your argument is retarded.

>>134839688
Back to the loop
>>134839328

This is the thing with liberal arguments, it's always a one way argument for everything
>We should do this
>We shouldn't do this because of X
>Yes we should because I already made you agreed into Z and is in some way correlated.
Feels like arguing with women.

File: 1495988878453.jpg (40KB, 323x412px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 323x412px

>>134840020
>Implying legal guardians mean shit here since you can be accuse them of being homophobe/thansphobe and call it a day

>>134840149
Prove your assertion that children can consent, either theoretically or show it in practice legally, because you are simply asserting children can consent with no evidence, like a woman.

>>134840417
Provide a citation for your claim, OP.

Pedophilia activism has been a long-standing struggle for pedophiles looking to lower or even abolish the age of consent, decriminalize child pornography, as well as arguing children can consent.They attempt to provide support to other pedophiles who would otherwise be reluctant to discuss their attractions for fear of being ostracized. Most pedophiles understand that there is an innate power imbalance between adults and children, but they argue that within the correct ethical framework, relationships can take place in a mutually beneficial fashion.

Many in the movement actively campaign for the idea that children are able to properly consent to sex —a belief NOT held by the vast majority of people, cultures, experts in child development and legal authorities. Many of the prominent pedophile activists, and even organizations, have been convicted or involved in child pornography and/or abuse. Many publicized incidents link members and groups associated with the movement to actual sexual child abuse and by the similarity of the movement’s views to the views used by sexual child abusers to justify their abuse.

>>134840428
In a scenario where we already agreed that kids could and should be the electants when it come to sex/gender leftist arguments for legalising weed could easily be used to promote a consenting agenda for kids, with the already strong normalising of paedophilia
See
>>134837991
Then a political campaign sponsored by political correctness and post modernism could in fact, make children be the highest in the herarchy of control over their inexperienced bodies.

>>134827137
The federal government doesn't have the constitutional authority to tell people they can't be in possession of drugs. DEA is an illegal operation. We also have politicians making millions off private prisons eating up taxpayer money full of low level drug offenders. I'm pretty based but I have to admit that the war on drugs was a cheap power play by Reagan to get demographics that typically voted Democrat incarcerated so they couldn't vote. Is it mostly degenerate shenanigans? Yeah, but the government doesn't get to do whatever it wants.

>>134841036
>In a scenario where we already agreed that kids could and should be the electants when it come to sex/gender
We agreed no such thing because we are discussing reality and not your delusions.

And I explicitly refuted this inane assertion right here you silly cunt >>134840020

>>134840468
I don't need to, where do you live? Kids with irresponsible leftists parents can decide over their gender since 2012, it's old news. Do you know about hormone taking? Or premature trans surgical operations?
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/videos/5-year-old-boy-chooses-to-live-life-as-a-girl/84607846/
What is the guarantee that this behaviour won't expand? Where will be the right to put a stop to this madness if the right won't fight anymore?

>>134841461
You're explicitly stating their parents have final decision and that the children have final decision, your argument is retarded.

>>134841583
>One post about potential outcome of a venomous agenda
>Other of the current state of this agenda
My argument is as retarded as selling drugs to kids.

>>134841171
You call it delusion, I see a potential outcome based on a already growing tendency.
You can't see any further than your nose lets you.

>>134842106
There's little utility in discussing your delusions about the future. I assumed we were discussing actual reality as you continually referenced actual reality, I sincerely hope this is why you've asserted such inane opinions.

>>134842298
K, enjoy your weed. Hope you don't get cancer.

>>134842447
I've not even posted about cannabis, I don't particularly care.

Your argument is the ideology which put Hillary Clinton into the white house will continue to erode society the point raping children is OK.

Well, that's an opinion, but it's kinda retarded.