sapphi_snake said:
Akvod said:
sapphi_snake said:
Akvod said:
Errr. I think you guys have a weak argument actually. There are such thing as loli pornography. Are you guys saying that loli "art" is okay, but loli "porn" isn't?
Look, this artistic argument itself is stupid. The question should be, "What's the consequence of allowing loli pornography to be purchased or owned"?
My answer: Nothing, as of now. No individual is having their rights violated by the creation and ownership of such material, and no negative social effects have been scientifically found yet.
|
Actually, graphic images portraying children in sexual situations is simply illegal, regardless of whether it's featured in a genuine work of art or not.
|
Err... Your point?
|
Was replying to the underlined. |
Yeah, and where in my post did I mention or doubt the actual legality of anything? I'm talking about whether or not creating or owning loli material should be a crime in the first place.
