I'm saying that any ban of media risks entirely different things being caught up in it as the only one who would can view the content is the state. There's nothing stopping a news article contrary to the narrative being labelled as pornography, nobody would be able to say differently so the charges could be applied to anything.
That's the same logic people use when they say we should ban guns because of the one in a million school shooting.
Do not make policies based on the extrodinarily unlikely outlying possibility.
We have a corrupt government pushing degeneracy and you don't want to make laws to ban degeneracy because...you'd rather have interracial gangbangs and simulated incest porn than risk the government censoring something?
Since when is government overreach and corruption an "extrodinarily unlikely outlying possibility"?
We have a corrupt government pushing degeneracy and you don't want to make laws to ban degeneracy because...you'd rather have interracial gangbangs and simulated incest porn than risk the government censoring something?
I'd prefer a blind eye turned to extra judicial action, if we don't have that then we know the government doesn't serve us.
You already have the corrupt government and you will always have a corrupt government. Such has been government since the dawn of time. Might as well ban the worst of what you can while you can.
Serious question: do you happen to be a Boomer?
(post is archived)