no excuse

`Price $3750.00`

<:pepewot:327934404234313739>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESx_hy1n7HA

Also this is some weird code

@johnfrum what's "obscene" is 100% up to whoever's in power at the time and, as such, that definition is prone to abuse. Therefore fuck that. Free speech is free speech unless it infringes on the rights of others

Get bent, Commie shitsuck

yes, stop making america ungreat 😡

when will commiefornians learn??

@Matthew shut up

I know speech is impractical to limit for the reason you stated but at the same time I'm not going to pretend the intent was to give degenerates a pass and a voice.

libtards still assmad that trump-sama won

lmaoing tbh

Poor John. If it were up to him, people would only be able to masturbate to same-race heterosexual porn, and only during government mandated hours. It's a good thing he'll be stacking boxes till the day he dies instead of influencing public opinion 😊

Shouldnt you join fedora in his vow of silence

@Matthew if it were up to me I wouldnt change anything, you retard which I have stated over and over. Masturbation isnt a social issue worth getting into.

But what people masturbate TO is? <:thvnk:332928260004642827>

I don't like images of children getting abused and would very much like for the people who get off to it to be used as jamal's chew toy but on the scale of things worth devoting time and resources to they are low on the priority list.

But they aren't children. They're pictures.

No shit

Don't anthropomorphize jpegs, John.

If we were talking about those photorealistic 3D renders, that are almost indistinguishable from the real thing, I'd be with you 100%

But anime children?? Cmon

Intent matters and the people who get off to it are disgusting people who in a perfect world should be found and excluded from society. But practically there will never be the resources and if there was there will never be any group of people who are benevolent enough to be trusted to only do thier job.

What if you wank to loli once or twice

@Matthew Why draw the line at renders at that point? Child pornography is illegal because of the victimization, soon technology will make renders near indistinguishable from the real thing and then you will sound a lot like me regarding the issue.

>muh morality

No. Laws ought to be based on victimization or lack thereof.

If nobody is victimized, it ought to be kosher.

If I drew 16 2 year olds getting gangbanged by dogs, who would be hurt by that?

The world at large by having another obscene thing that could trigger someone crazy to do something bad.

You could draw 16 children?

talented artist(autist)

But legislating around the lowest common denominator doesnt really work so I suppose its best left alone.

I feel like you guys hit a deadlock in this, since both sides have some truth to it

I think we agree on what should happen in practice, I'm simply more vocal about my disgust

>implying there's some normal guy out there who will just snap and become a pedo because someone drew a childlike person getting fucked

Normal guys aren't the problem tho

The crazies are

how do you think traps started

The crazies were crazies to begin with

And unless I'm mistaking something, John idea was to remove or censor the work a crazy could see and try to reenact