Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 4:44:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/11/2013 3:23:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 7/11/2013 3:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/11/2013 3:05:00 PM (view original):
Really?
This particular circumstance doesn't harm anyone, but he's said multiple times that because of the severity and how terrible the production of child porn is that all ownership should be illegal.
Also I think he's being a little vague to **** you off.
He's always a little vague when his argument is a FAILURE.
The entire point is that his "One Size Fits All" Big Three actually doesn't fit all or that he is severly lacking in morals. He won't concede either so he'll repeat questions, disappear until the subject changes or just be vague.
I never said anything is one size fits all. In the case of gay marriage, there is no reasonable argument to ban it. Is there a reasonable argument to criminalize child porn possession?
I'm going to need an answer here.
Do you agree that watching child porn is deviant behavior? Let's assume "yes".
Do you think that anyone, anyone on earth, thinks that homosexuality is deviant behavior? Let's assume "yes".
Why is your opinion more valid? As we've agreed, there is a situation where viewing child porn will "make more people happy", "provide more personal freedom" and "not cause any additional harm to anyone else." What's the difference here because that seems to be your guidelines for allowing SSM?