O.K. I put myself in the shoes of those that disagree with me.
This is where I am at.
We can keep debating forever on this topic and stances won't change. I think we can all agree with that!
People have sited free speech regardless of the FACT it is not covered by it.
(I mean I don't want to point out the bleeding obvious, but if this material was covered by the first amendment and the freedom of speech, his
defense would have simply sited it. I mean really!)
You will argue that it should be covered for various reasons.
Whilst I could maintain that there is a risk and a harm to society and so it should not be seen as free speech or a right etc.
These would all seem to be reasonable arguments. We could go back and forward all day.
So, I stepped back. I looked at the reality of the actual situation. Not how our arguments paint the situation.
The laws are there. They are there, and have been for a while now. That is the reality.
So the whole thread is just our own self-righteous babble.
I'll put my hand up!
That would be the simple version of this thread.
There is really no point in continuing the tit for tat with anyone on any side. We have our views and opinions. That is all this thread is about. Our
own soap boxes, which is cool.
As many on here seem to have a problem with the situation detailed in the events in the OP's link, this is really your axe.
Your claims are varied, your concerns and points are as well.
As I sat in these shoes you wear, I thought: What are you going to do about it!
All those that think that it is wrong to legislate against the images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse, and bestiality. Those that think this
material should be freely created, published, received and possessed, that it is free speech:
Lobby to have the laws changed.
Contact your representatives.
Remember what you claim is at stake(just a few examples to set the tone):
"I agree this is a true example of being punished for thought crime". post by
"The manga harms no one and so is protected under free speech,"post by
**(not being picky, it is not covered)**
"i am supporting the right for this man to own the images because they should be protected under free speech. They're disgusting, i think the guy is
disgusting but no one is harmed"
post by ImaginaryReality1984
"As i mentioned earlier, for me it is simply a matter of free speech. As long as no one is hurt then it should be acceptable
. No child is hurt
in the manufacture, distribution or viewing of these images and therefore they are protected (or should be) under the guise of freedom of
post by ImaginaryReality1984
"2. If laws can exist just because people don't like something, even though it is a victimless crime then are we not on a slippery slope where all
manner of things can be banned?"
post by ImaginaryReality1984
"Again i point out that there is no evidence this man has ever hurt a child and yet he has collected this stuff for
years."post by ImaginaryReality1984
**note- absence of evidence is not evidence of absence(its an ATS favorite). And the severity of any sentence is related to a perceived risk to
society as much as it is a punishment, because he withheld information relating to other deviant activities surrounding minors, this could be a factor
in the sentence)
This is the general stance against the state of affairs, that the Laws that actually exist are wrong, unjust, problematic, unconstitutional even!
So prove that to the community.
You need to establish that there should be a right and freedom to create images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality because this
right is not in conflict with other rights or principles.
Currently the right to produce, receive and posses images depicting children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality is in conflict with other
principles. I would argue that there is a view that in principle the general interest of the community at large is served by these images being
illegal. You disagree with that, so If you wish to test my argument, just go outside your house and start asking people!
You will need to establish that the general interest of the community is served by having a right to produce, receive and possess images of children
in sex acts, child abuse and bestiality so as to resolve the current conflict.
The Supreme court, on a number of occasions, has stated that the laws are in the best interest of children. You need to argue that this is not true.
You also need to acknowledge recognize that this issue is not simply about the rights of only the people who want to create, receive and possess
images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality. It is also about the rights and freedoms of people who feel that other principles are far
more valuable than a persons right to produce, receive or possess images of child pornography. It is the value of these principles and these values
that relegate images of children in acts of sex, sexual abuse and bestiality outside of the freedom of speech and a right to produce, receive or
You need to change that.
I would say you will need to do this in context of the "harm principle" and the "offense principle". These are the principles that conflict with
the principles of freedom of speech in this issue.
Maybe you should plan a media brief to circulate amongst the MSM detailing your concerns relating to the laws and policing of images of children in
sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality. Perhaps you could start a FREE CHRISTOPHER HANDLEY
movement, chuck in your cash and resources to defend him:
Create a political movement to address the issue.
Go into you community and engage you fellow citizens.
Explain your stance to your neighbors.
Perhaps you could set up parents and friends meeting to share your concerns about free speech, and the rights of individuals that like to view images
of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality for sexual pleasure.
Try and garner support and maybe change this:
In response, the Protect Act narrows the prohibition to cover only depictions that the defendant’s community would consider
Read More www.wired.com...
A lot of you guys seem fond of throwing logic and reason around. Well, that would be the logical and reasonable action in order to right what you all
so passionately feel is wrong and unjust.
Seeing as many of you feel you have the right logic and rationale relating to the issue, you should be able to convince people in your community to
support a change in the perception that cartoon images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality are not obscene nor pornography in order
to change the Protect Act, and the Limitations on Free Speech because, at the moment the defendants community considers it as obscene.
You need to change the fact that the community considers these images obscene.
Because, as I have said before. This is not about free speech, it is about what is acceptable, and what people will tolerate.
You think it is just about the free speech of people who like images of children in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality. This is the wrong approach.
The laws are there for the community, not the offender. Change the community, if you can.
Your stance would be to endorse it as material that is not obscene under the legislative definitions of those
That way you would argue it should be covered by free speech.
Tell people that they will lose their rights:
"The other interesting thing to see is how quickly people abandon their freedoms when they disagree with
something."post by ImaginaryReality1984
Remind people that they are abandoning their rights to create, receive and possess images of kids in sex acts, sexual abuse and bestiality.
That should motivate them for sure!
Make sure you stress the importance of this. Say: "look here at this protect act, it may appear to be a more specific law constructed to narrow the
laws so as to avoid invasive and encroaching legislation, but don't be fooled people, it really is about taking away your rights'.
Congress passed the Protect Act after the Supreme Court struck down a broader law prohibiting any visual depictions of minors engaged in sexual
activity, including computer-generated imagery and other fakes. The high court ruled that the ban was overbroad, and could cover legitimate speech,
including Hollywood productions.
The nerve of these people! Actually refining laws to protect rights!
This is what you need to change.
BTW-Don't reply to this, save the time and energy-go and tell your family and friends, your neighbors and community and your elected representatives
that we need to change.
Be the change you want to see!
p.s. Just a tip-
I would invest in a bullet proof vest when you try and convert people to your way of thinking.
Or perhaps just remain a lurker on forums as a faux crusader and defender of the First Amendment and freedom of speech and human rights.
[edit on 18/2/10 by atlasastro]