It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I have no idea what you even mean by this.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: nightbringr
a reply to: Kurokage
Don't take what she says to heart. She already said she disagrees with the her friend having their child porn 'art' being taken away from them.
Her agenda here is frighteningly obvious and repugnant.
It is suspicious that both you censors and those busted for disseminating images of abused children call child porn free speech. Repugnant indeed.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: nightbringr
a reply to: Kurokage
Don't take what she says to heart. She already said she disagrees with the her friend having their child porn 'art' being taken away from them.
Her agenda here is frighteningly obvious and repugnant.
It is suspicious that both you censors and those busted for disseminating images of abused children call child porn free speech. Repugnant indeed.
noun
1.
a conception of something in its perfection.
2.
a standard of perfection or excellence.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
www.abovetopsecret.com...
LesMisanthrope views on free speech and pedophilia here.
I have no idea what you even mean by this.
If it helps, I've never once used to word ' free speech ' to describe the disgusting crime your friend was caught with.
originally posted by: Kurokage
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: nightbringr
a reply to: Kurokage
Don't take what she says to heart. She already said she disagrees with the her friend having their child porn 'art' being taken away from them.
Her agenda here is frighteningly obvious and repugnant.
It is suspicious that both you censors and those busted for disseminating images of abused children call child porn free speech. Repugnant indeed.
You seem to love chasing your own tail and try making the same arguments and insults every time, in a previous thread a poster called you out and you refussed to say that a pedophiles freedom of speech should be curtailed. In my opinion that ends any argument you have or say!!
It's your blind devotion thats repugnant.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: ScepticScot
www.abovetopsecret.com...
LesMisanthrope views on free speech and pedophilia here.
ScepticScot conflating defending free speech with defending pedophilia in the post quoted.
Did I? Where did I do that?
I think your posts however are quite clear.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ScepticScot
Did I? Where did I do that?
I think your posts however are quite clear.
They are, as are your motives of trying to slander others.
What slander? It's your own words
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: nightbringr
a reply to: Kurokage
Don't take what she says to heart. She already said she disagrees with the her friend having their child porn 'art' being taken away from them.
Her agenda here is frighteningly obvious and repugnant.
It is suspicious that both you censors and those busted for disseminating images of abused children call child porn free speech. Repugnant indeed.
This seems much closer to slander.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ScepticScot
This seems much closer to slander.
That's a statement of truth. Slander is false.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ScepticScot
This seems much closer to slander.
That's a statement of truth. Slander is false.
No deliberately trying to associate someone with pedophilia is pretty clear slander. Linking to your own words is not.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ScepticScot
No deliberately trying to associate someone with pedophilia is pretty clear slander. Linking to your own words is not.
Linking to my words and saying those are my views of free speech and pedophilia is demonstrably false. Nowhere you linked do I state my views of pedophilia.
People can read your own words and judge for themselves. Unlike you trying to associate another poster with pedophilia.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kurokage
That is not a statement of truth in the slightest!!
There are plenty of cases in the United States where pedophiles argued their materials are considered free speech.