@J_Hol95 In light of the new reporting restrictions, the journal removed the comment from its Web site, “for legal reasons.” At least six other editorials and comments, which did not question Letby’s guilt, remain on the site.
@EmuOther@TellTheTroooth@VaushV hey you get outta town charlie brown and check the twitter handle, only thing im philin' on is crepes suzette and films by Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Marc Caro
@EmuOther@TellTheTroooth@VaushV We're not using different definitions. Consuming child pornography is immoral, unethical, and antithetical to a healthy, functioning society. In virtually every respect. If you truly don't understand why, then please stay away from kids and get some help. Quickly.
@EmuOther@TellTheTroooth@VaushV "if it harmed the viewer, they wouldn't be watching it."
"Listen if this heroin addiction harmed me I wouldn't be addicted to heroin, would I??!"
As for the second part of your statement, that doesn't dignify a response. Please get some help, sir.
@EmuOther@TellTheTroooth@VaushV Yes, it would cause harm. It harms the viewer, and it harms the child who was sexually exploited/raped. This isn't a hypothetical. This is what happens when child pornography is consumed.
Please, please get off the internet and get help, sir.
@EmuOther@TellTheTroooth@VaushV Never thought the discourse would get this bad buuutt....Yes, viewing child pornography is immoral even if it was created 100 years ago and money doesn't change hands between the viewer and the creator/distributor. Do you actually disagree with this?
@EmuOther@cheybey70 @Mostsmartestguy @CalReidy@InsensitiveCrip @Nerva3D1 @mandystadt@gigabilly@VaushV@jk_rowling Buddy who gives a ratfucking shit whether money changes hands. You're talking about deriving pleasure from the rape and sexual exploitation. of. children. Do think it's morally/ethically permissible to derive pleasure from the rape and sexual exploitation of children?