Should a free society allow for the viewing of child pornography?

[Spideynw]

@Jon Irenicus

No, not “just like animals”. In their case there is hardly any prospect of a development of a rational faculty.

And it is irrelevant whether one has the capacity for developing rational faculty, because it does not tell us if consent was granted or withheld.

@Jon Irenicus

And again: absence of consent does not equate licence to do whatever one wishes to a child. That is nuts.

The only thing it would probably not equate licence to do to a child is kill the child, since once someone is killed, it becomes impossible to determine if the person was consenting or not, or if they even had the power to do so.

@Jon Irenicus

Yet it does. The existence of vagueness does not mean everything and anything is justified so stop acting as if it does.

Then don’t be like all the other hacks I find in life and rather than just spouting your beliefs, attempt to answer my questions and to make some kind of consistent argument.

@Jon Irenicus

Bullshit. The courts are the institutions which decide whether a property right is to be enforced or not. All they need to do is refuse to recognize that a parent is acting in a child’s interests, and for the PDA to thus refuse to continue enforcing their claim, and the child’s custody will be up for grabs.

And the PDA probably would not be around for long for not enforcing parent’s rights.

@Jon Irenicus

Anyway, I’m done with this, as it’s not going anywhere. I’ll be taking a break for the next few days, so see you all then…

Typical.

[scineram]

@Sceptic

It doesn’t make sense to say that reproducing money is evil theft because it steals others savings and productivity - and in the same breath claim that it doesn’t matter a damn if you’re doing to to music or software producers because somehow THEIR productivity and value doesn’t matter huh?

Of course. Neither one is theft or stealing.

[Spideynw]

Can someone start a separate thread about patents/copyrights/trademarks please, instead of hijacking this thread?

[Morty]

It’s over now, Sceptic bowed out.

[Juan]

@GilesStratton

@Juan

Do you think that a free society would be just a bunch of small towns with their own morality/thought police ? Because if that's not the case, I don't see how your socially conservative utopia is going to 'work'...

Strawman.

Not really. Please do describe how your system is going to operate. For instance, who’s going to “physically remove” homosexuals from “society” ? How are communications going to be monitored to know who sees what ?

Typical leftist you seem very keen on defending this “right” of yours Juan, one must wonder why that is…

I’m defending the general right of people to do as they please. If you don’t like the idea that people (including children) may choose things you don’t like, then maybe you should give up libertarianism ?

[Eduard_Gabriel_Munte]

@GilesStratton

@Brainpolice

That’s irrelevant to the question, and it doesn’t follow that because one has children one favors total exile for people who watch child pornography.

Usually it does, that is, if the parents don’t hate their children.

That sounds like democratic BS. Yeah, of course it’s easy to favor such a thing or even vote for it, but how many people would actually pay for or engage in fighting for this? And keep in mind that tracking this is not trivial. This kind of stuff only works when you can pass responsibility to someone else, e.g. through vote in communitarianism or democracy.

[MatthewF]

I don’t believe anyone here can make a solid case for punishing the viewing of pornography. If I am correct that makes this a debate about the filming of pornography.

I don’t know if parents own their children or not, but…

If you come to my home to take my child away for any reason you should come prepared to defend yourself.

If I hear that you are making pornography with a child you should be prepared to defend yourself.

In a free society I would hope that there would be a PDA in my area that I could hire to help support me. You might have other priorities and so hire a different PDA.

Would this be an acceptable society?

[Spideynw]

@MatthewF

Would this be an acceptable society?

No, that would be chaos. What if I think you should die for paying for sex?

[MatthewF]

Who’s going to enforce that?

[Spideynw]

@MatthewF

Who’s going to enforce that?

You were the one that said you would go after people who make child pornography and have a PDA to back you up. This is simply a might makes right mentality. I am sure there are people out there that would think fornicating is worthy of death.

[MatthewF]

My apologies. That did sound rather violent. However, what would prevent exactly this scenario from occurring in a free society?

[nibbler491]

@MatthewF

My apologies. That did sound rather violent. However, what would prevent exactly this scenario from occurring in a free society?

The cost. You’d be hemorraghing money to do what..? Kill pedophiles? I doubt you’d be able to kill that many anyways. You’d probably get your head blown off pretty quickly(either when you try to enter another person’s house to murder them, or when multiple PDA’s are sent to kill you for murder).

[MatthewF]

Good point. I would probably have better things to spend my money on.

So, would there be many PDA’s that would come after me if instead of shooting this person I was to simply haul them in(or pay to have them hauled in) to my PDA?

If not, are we saying that there is nothing that can be done about filming child pornography?

If this is so, I would still be willing to live with it in exchange for being free. Just don’t quote me on that if I ever run for public office again[:#]

[hayekianxyz]

@Juan

How are communications going to be monitored to know who sees what

That’s a different question entirely.

@Juan

For instance, who’s going to “physically remove” homosexuals from “society”

The owner of the community, of course, who else?

@Juan

If you don’t like the idea that people (including children) may choose things you don’t like, then maybe you should give up libertarianism ?

Or perhaps, you need to come to terms with rules.

[hayekianxyz]

@Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu

This kind of stuff only works when you can pass responsibility to someone else, e.g. through vote in communitarianism or democracy.

Or when people like having high values for their property, which they do.

[Juan]

@GilesStratton

@Juan

How are communications going to be monitored to know who sees what

That’s a different question entirely.

That’s an evasive answer eh ?

@GilesStratton

@Juan

For instance, who’s going to “physically remove” homosexuals from “society”

The owner of the community, of course, who else?

So, the monarch of the town will also be a police thug ? Nice.

@GilesStratton

Or perhaps, you need to come to terms with rules.

Alternatively you could come to terms with reality and realize that a hypothetical, conservative, monarchical small town is not a free society by any stretch of the imagination.

[Brainpolice]

The owner of the community, of course, who else?

Communities aren’t owned by single people in a free society, different portions are owned by different people. A community owned by a single person would be a mini-monarchy.

Or perhaps, you need to come to terms with **rules.

**

What is that even supposed to mean? Again, you fall back on conservative viewpoints in favor of “order” for the sake of “order”, based on an assumed traditionalist morality.

[Brainpolice]

@GilesStratton

@Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu

This kind of stuff only works when you can pass responsibility to someone else, e.g. through vote in communitarianism or democracy.

Or when people like having high values for their property, which they do.

That has nothing to do with what’s in question. It doesn’t follow from someone wanting high values for their property that they can justify a uniform law banning a vice they don’t like for an entire community.

There is a good reason why I call you a conservative, you know, since you fall back on arguments that justify arbitrary authority that clearly rub up against libertarianism.

[hayekianxyz]

@Brainpolice

Communities aren’t owned by single people in a free society, different portions are owned by different people. A community owned by a single person would be a mini-monarchy.

Call it what you like. You can’t refute the economic incentives.

@Brainpolice

What is that even supposed to mean? Again, you fall back on conservative viewpoints in favor of “order” for the sake of “order”, based on an assumed traditionalist morality.

It means that you’re a child.

[Byzantine]

@Juan

Alternatively you could come to terms with reality and realize that a hypothetical, conservative, monarchical small town is not a free society by any stretch of the imagination.

Don’t like 'em, don’t live there.