Hypocrisy Why I heavily dislike the term "moralfag" and think terms like "agecuck" or simply "hypocrite" are much more accurate

[Mainländer]

saying that someone is supporting chomos by watching cp is like saying i support musicians by downloading from napster

Or saying someone supports the terrorist industry because they watched/downloaded for free the video of the 9/11 attacks.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Or saying someone supports the terrorist industry because they watched/downloaded the video of the 9/11 attacks.

i wonder if people would want someone arrested for drawing naked children

 

[Mainländer]

i wonder if people would want someone arrested for drawing naked children

Some people want you jailed for even thinking about such things.

 

[Caesercel]

Or saying someone supports the terrorist industry because they watched/downloaded for free the video of the 9/11 attacks.

i wonder if people would want someone arrested for drawing naked children

I can’t believe it. Top kek fuel.

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

Some people want you jailed for even thinking about such things.

like we live in george orwell's 1984. imagine executing someone for thoughtcrimes

I can’t believe it. Top kek fuel.

calm down

 

[Mainländer]

I can’t believe it. Top kek fuel.

You said you were sick of debating and so am I tbh. I really wish we stopped. But if you really want to continue, go ahead and refute:

Is having sex with children a crime? Yes.
Is physical assault a crime? Yes.

You think the former is more serious than the second and I wholeheartedly agree. But the point is, if possession of media containing violent crimes against people should be illegal, what should happen, if we apply the principle consistently, is that both of those should be crimes, even if one has a much milder sentence than the other.

X= more serious crime
Y= less serious crime

Simple possession of media containing X= crime
Simple possession of media containing Y= SHOULD BE A CRIME AS WELL ACCORDING TO YOUR LOGIC, only a less serious one, but still a crime.

All I'm doing is applying your logic consistently. And if you don't like the people being punched example, let's go back to the torture example then:

X= more serious crime (gouging someone's eyes out)
Y= less serious crime (raping someone)

Simple possession of media containing Y= crime
Simple possession of media containing X= HOW CAN IT NOT BE A CRIME?

 

[Caesercel]

You said you were sick of debating and so am I tbh. I really wish we stopped. But if you really want to continue, go ahead and refute:

Is having sex with children a crime? Yes.
Is physical assault a crime? Yes.

You think the former is more serious than the second and I wholeheartedly agree. But the point is, if possession of media containing violent crimes against people should be illegal, what should happen, if we apply the principle consistently, is that both of those should be crimes, even if one has a much milder sentence than the other.

X= more serious crime
Y= less serious crime

Simple possession of media containing X= crime
Simple possession of media containing Y= SHOULD BE A CRIME AS WELL ACCORDING TO YOUR LOGIC, only a less serious one, but still a crime.

All I'm doing is applying your logic consistently. And if you don't like the people being punched example, let's go back to the torture example then:

X= more serious crime (gouging someone's eyes out)
Y= less serious crime (raping someone)

Simple possession of media containing Y= crime
Simple possession of media containing X= HOW CAN IT NOT BE A CRIME?

I have tagged you with my latest comment to Bilk if you want a response to that. Btw I was not debating anything. I just genuinely laughed for 2 minutes at the levels of pedo coping going on.

 

[Mainländer]

I have tagged you with my latest comment to Bilk if you want a response to that. Btw I was not debating anything. I just genuinely laughed for 2 minutes at the levels of pedo coping going on.

Terrorism is a crime, thousands of innocent people died horribly during the 9/11 attacks, the people who did it very likely wanted attention, some people like radical anti-Americans enjoyed watching it... idk man I'm just checking all the boxes here...

Also, I didn't receive the alert of you tagging me in that other comment you mentioned. Maybe you added me after you had already posted, in an edit? When you do it that way, it fails to give an alert to the person. Send me the link.

 

[Caesercel]

Terrorism is a crime, thousands of innocent people died horribly during the 9/11 attacks, the people who did it very likely wanted attention, some people like radical anti-americans enjoyed watching it... idk man I'm just checking all the boxes here...

Also, I didn't receive the alert of you tagging me in that other comment you mentioned. Maybe you added me after you had already posted, in an edit? When you do it that way, it fails to give an alert to the person. Send me the link.

Oh. Yeah it was an edit. I didn't know that. Though its only for reference purposes. It was not originally addressed to you.

As for the kek fuel..... "watching terrorism = abetting terrorism, cuz terrorism is a media production industry?" and the even funnier one, "drawing naked children = watching child porn produced by raping real children" If you guys were trolling then i must say, the best ones I have met yet. Edmund doesn't even pretend now that he is trying to expose some (falsely percieved) hypocrisy in law. Half his points have nothing to do with the topic at hand. They are just general pedophile sympathizing.

 

[Mainländer]

Oh. Yeah it was an edit. I didn't know that. Though its only for reference purposes. It was not originally addressed to you.

As for the kek fuel..... "watching terrorism = abetting terrorism, cuz terrorism is a media production industry?" and the even funnier one, "drawing naked children = watching child porn produced by raping real children" If you guys were trolling then i must say, the best ones I have met yet. Edmund doesn't even pretend now that he is trying to expose some (falsely percieved) hypocrisy in law. Half his points have nothing to do with the topic at hand. They are just general pedophile sympathizing.

If terrorists wanted attention, some people gave it to them by watching the footage (not illegal)
If CP producers wanted attention, some people gave it to them by watching CP (oops... illegal)

Oh, but it's not only for the attention, it's a CP industry, so they want money! Wait... people who just downloaded the CP for free didn't give any to them

 

[Caesercel]

You are right that there is no way to know if a gore movie was build for sale. That's why law enforcement is supposed to deal with each case considering the unique circumstances. logical consistency is not the only thing that laws consider(in fact its one of the least important aspect). What is immoral is not necessarily illegal and vice versa.

The reality of the situation is
1. Gore porn watchers have plethora of options to enjoy stuff that is just randomly filmed or even filmed with intent but violence was not commited by producer. This snubs the chance for an industry and it is a fact that deliberate gore video production is much smaller than child porn.

2. Gore porn consumption is fundamentally different from child porn consumption. Just because both are immoral doesn't mean they can be compared. Different psychological phemomena. One is linked with anti social behaviour related to many kinds of psychological disorders. Other is a fundamental sexual urge. This changes the implications for the subject who is consuming either. The state has to use different approaches to decide how to deal with such individuals and which ones to just leave be. Based on the implications of their habits for society.

3. Child molestation is different from violence as well. The risk-reward equation is unbalanced. This is reflected in the fact that a child porn consumer may actually molest children he comes in contact with, but it is highly unlikely even for a grotesque violence consumer to just go on a killing spree. The psychological relation between watching it and doing it are different in both. And in case of child porn it is very closely related.

4. There are healthy ways to consume violence. Everyone does so. We have action movies, movies like Saw etc. And so there are healthy ways for pedophiles to deal with their urges. If they are moving to illegal activities to fulfill those urges the problem lies with them and leaving them be to do so is unwarranted.

5. Most importantly, why is it illegal? Simple, a child porn consumer, even if he indulges in freeware is aiding and abetting the exploitation of children. Nobody just uploads the child rape film he bought on the dark web just because. He knows there are consumers in the network. And those consumers can and do act as distributors in their turn. They are perpetuating a system of exploitation even if they are at the recieving end of it. Plus laws against possession help law enforcement nab distributors. You only downloaded and are not a distributor? Too bad buddy, you should never have downloaded to begin with. Its illegal for good reasons. Try to deal with your pedophilia by legal methods instead of watching literal child rape.

6. By above logic you'd say ban snuff films and I agree. But you say that it can't be differentiated from regular gore porn to which I disagree. And that's what investigation is for. The thing is, logistics in both cases are different as well. Nab a cp watcher and you have 100%hit the nail. Nab a gore watcher who may possess snuff and most likely you are wasting your time.

There will always be snuff, cp, murder, rape, theft etc. Law enforcement has to use their limited resources judiciously to maintain order and curb crime.

People who here believe that law is made to follow some arbitrary criteria of logical consistency clearly have little idea about how laws, culture or society work.(this is for you as well @Mainländer in case you needed a revision.)
Ps.. I am not a glow nigger. I am not even burgercel.

This was my recent comment to bbp. But its only for your reference. I must warn, it doesn't have anything new. Just the same points which debunked your logic, to percieve hypocrisy when there was none, a week ago.

If terrorists wanted attention, some people gave it to them by watching the footage (not illegal)
If CP producers wanted attention, some people gave it to them by watching CP (oops... illegal)

Oh, but it's not only for the attention, it's a CP industry, so they want money! Wait... people who just downloaded the CP for free didn't give any to them

As I've said to edmund your entire argument would fall apart if not for debunkable false equivalences. Oops they are debunkable so your arguments never held any water to begin with. You had to look for something as drastically different as terrorism from childporn industry and then use words like"they both do it for attention so they both must be same". Look if you don't have the intelligence to comprehend how or why some things are done in the real world. If you can't even see basic cause and effect irl. If your arguments are completely going to rely on philosophical hogwash and semantical nonsense with no hard material to support it. Why do you even try?

 

[Mainländer]

This was my recent comment to bbp. Buts its only for your reference. I must warn, it doesn't have anything new. Just the same points which debunked your logic, to percieve hypocrisy when there was none, a week ago.

That's way too big and all the points you made were already addressed by me in this thread or in the other one I linked in the OP here.

Let's leave it at that, deal? If you wanted to have the last word, here you go, you guys made me too tired to continue. I'm gonna sleep. If anyone has the patience to actually read everything from both threads they'll be able to decide for themselves who's right.

To anyone reading, my closing words for this debate: don't torture people, don't murder people, don't rape people, don't rape kids, don't give money to people to do any of these things. Don't even fap to CP or laugh at gore, that's sinful. Believe in the gospel found in 1st Cor 15 1-4 and get saved today, amen.

But think twice before supporting someone having their life ruined over watching stuff for free as well, please.

 

[Caesercel]

That's way too big and all the points you made were already addressed by me in this thread or in the other one I linked in the OP here.

Let's leave it at that, deal? If you wanted to have the last word, here you go, you guys made me too tired to continue. I'm gonna sleep. If anyone has the patience to actually read everything from both threads they'll be able to decide for themselves who's right.

To anyone reading, my closing words for this debate: don't torture people, don't murder people, don't rape people, don't rape kids, don't give money to people to do any of these things. Don't even fap to CP or laugh at gore, that's sinful. Believe in the gospel found in 1st Cor 15 1-4 and get saved today, amen.

But think twice before supporting someone having their life ruined over watching stuff for free as well, please.

If by addressed you mean repeating what you already said again and again then sure. You are missing the part where these are not arguments. These are facts of the real world. The real world for which these laws are made. The reality which you deliberately choose to ignore. You can only get so far by making air arguments that debate semantics and logic. The fact that you even compare child porn with terrorism demonstrates intellectual inability to stay at the topic at hand. And the lack of any knowledge of how terrorism or child porn work irl. Its like I am talking to a child who has only read these words like "child porn" or "terrorism" in a story book.

Btw if your pedophile didn't want to have his life get ruined he shouldn't have downloaded illegal stuff from the internet thus abetting in the exploitation of children.

 

[Mainländer]

This was my recent comment to bbp. But its only for your reference. I must warn, it doesn't have anything new. Just the same points which debunked your logic, to percieve hypocrisy when there was none, a week ago.

As I've said to edmund your entire argument would fall apart if not for debunkable false equivalences. Oops they are debunkable so your arguments never held any water to begin with. You had to look for something as drastically different as terrorism from childporn industry and then use words like"they both do it for attention so they both must be same". Look if you don't have the intelligence to comprehend how or why some things are done in the real world. If you can't even see basic cause and effect irl. If your arguments are completely going to rely on philosophical hogwash and semantical nonsense with no hard material to support it. Why do you even try?

That's a lot of fancy words and 0 arguments. You say "it's different!", then follow up with a flood of sophistry and random assumptions which I debunked, like "all people who download CP are dangerous pedos, all people who download gore are just harmless morbidly curious people!" You never proved a false equivalency between gore and CP. Both are crimes. Both are violent. Both are mostly amateur, not produced by any industry. Both can be downloaded for free from the internet. Both people who simply downloaded CP without paying it for and people who simply downloaded gore without paying for it are not supporting any industry. You can write a 500 paragraph text full of fancy psycho-theoretical stuff and it won't change any of these simple facts.

You're a very talented sophist and a very poor debater. I'm done. I won't reply anymore.

 

[Caesercel]

That's a lot of fancy words and 0 arguments. You say "it's different!", then follow up with a flood of sophistry and random assumptions which I debunked, like "all people who download CP are dangerous pedos, all people who download gore are just harmless morbidly curious people!" You never proved a false equivalency between gore and CP. Both are crimes. Both are violent. Both are mostly amateur, not produced by any industry. Both can be downloaded for free from the internet. Both people who simply downloaded CP without paying it for and people who simply downloaded gore without paying for it are not supporting any industry. You can write a 500 paragraph text full of fancy psycho-theoretical stuff and it won't change any of these simple facts.

You're a very talented sophist and a very poor debater. I'm done. I won't reply anymore.

I won't say you are a poor debater. I use sophistry because I am not here trying to prove how child porn is different from terrorism to a child who doesn't understand either concept enough that he would make the mistake of comparing the two. Ever heard of apples and oranges? As for all that you said about gore porn I have already addressed in that comment but you'd rather act like a broken record.


"Terrorist and child pornographers both want attention from their acts so consumption of both is literally same and should be treated similarly by law"

"Gore porn and child porn are immoral so they are literally same and should be treated exact same by law"