this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
0 points (NaN% liked)

libertarianism

396 readers
1 users here now

About us

An open, user owned community for the general disscussion of the libertarian philosophy.

Most people live their own lives by that code of ethics. Libertarians believe that that code should be applied consistently, even to the actions of governments, which should be restricted to protecting people from violations of their rights. Governments should not use their powers to censor speech, conscript the young, prohibit voluntary exchanges, steal or “redistribute” property, or interfere in the lives of individuals who are otherwise minding their own business.

Source: https://www.libertarianism.org/essays/what-is-libertarianism

Rules

1. Stay on topicWe are a libertarian community. There are no restrictions regarding different stances on the political spectrum, but all posts should be related to the philosophy of libertarianism.

2. Be polite to others and respects each others opinions.Be polite to others and respects each others opinions. We don't want any form of gatekeeping or circlejerk culture here.

3. Stay constructive and informationalIn general, all types of contributions are allowed, but the relevance to this community must always be evident and presented openly by the contributor. Posts that do not meet these requirements will be removed after a public warning. Also remember to cite you sources!

4. Use self-moderation measures first before reporting.This community is fundamentally built upon freedom of speech. Since everyone understands libertarianism differently and we do not want to exclude any kind of content a priori, we appeal to the individual users to block/mute posts or users who do not meet their requirements. Please bear this in mind when filing a report

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This is more of a 2 part question. Should child porn that does not include a real child be illegal? If so, who is being harmed by it?

The other question is; does giving a pedophile access to "imitation" children give them an outlet for their desire, so they won't try to engage with real children, or does it just reinforce their desire, thus helping them to rationalize their behavior and lead to them being more encouraged to harm real children?

I've heard psychologists discuss both sides, but I don't think we have any real life studies to go off of because the technology is so new.

I'm just curious what the other thought out there are from people who are more liberty minded.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MentalEdge@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How about three fronts? I have a lot to say so more bite-sized bits would help get through you non-existent attention span.

[–] jesterraiin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, yes, of course.

Now, would that be all?

[–] MentalEdge@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Look at it this way, I didn't declare an end to our delightful little chat, I declared my victory in the original matter.

You stopped forwarding arguments and counter-arguments two comments in, giving me the win by default.

All you have left, is acting like the ball is in my court and I'm the one who is refusing to make the next move.

[–] jesterraiin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] MentalEdge@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Observe, as the creature finally clams up completely, refusing all exchange. Resorting to a final four words that carry no meaning whatsoever, except the implied 'fuck you'.

Truly, a deep thinker of the interwebs."

[–] jesterraiin@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] MentalEdge@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"In desperation, it repeats the words in an attempt to have the last word.

Unaware, that if the last words spoken are obviously meaningless, they aren't last words at all. But simply the pathetic death-cry of a loser."

I do hope you reflect on what I've told you, despite my being mean. You're clearly not so dumb as to be completely without hope. Even if I'm wrong, which I well might be, your arguing skills are so bad they actively sabotage your own message.