i see the phrase "you might be"

"if you cannot"

nice post edit.

Anyway. I didn't intend to piss off this Orgasmics nick. I simply dipped in to quote and post my amazement at how people can think of stories and images as what causes people to kill and rape.

It did and still does sound ridiculous to me.

This same "mothers rage" is what keeps parents claiming I as an adult shouldnt have violent video games because her kid may get ahold of it. This same mothers rage is what makes women kill people at abortion clinics. These people sit here trying to protect children from people, when the same people would not allow these "pornographers" anywhere near their kids. Its silly.

It's funny how these threads that are so based on emotion get twisted around and out of hand because someone starts calling someone "dumbass" because they feel their opinion is more valid, or because they do not agree that "fant6asy rape" is not real rape.

I need not explain these things, but i still stand by my quote. That it is amazing people can sit here and believe stories about killing make people kill, and that their should not be writing about topics because it would encourage people to commit murder.

Its ridiculous, i dont really have anything else to say. im going finish a tour im launching this week.

cheers

http://www.fletchbucks.com

Leaving the story content aside for the moment, if you were to come out and criticise tangible child pornography, would that be a case of you wearing a good guy badge? The answer is obviously no. You draw your line in the sand at that point, and others draw theirs at another point. Don't assume that because someone has a different view to you that it means something sinister.

But by your logic, you criticising the production of child pornography could be seen as a "good guy badge" by others. You know, parading your morals on a porn board.. look at me, look at me?

Orgasmics,

I believe that most people posting here are forgetting where to draw the line in their own minds for the sake of freedom of speech rights.

The comparisons to justify their beliefs are not right, unless the website?s author fought tooth and nail to be published and has distributors; not just a website that anyone can put up and charge money to get fantasy writings on how to abuse a child while getting sexual pleasure?even if readers don?t act out...sad but most do, if they are reading this kind of shit.

Nothing is wrong about fictional fantasy or role playing among adults. However, there is something wrong depicting a child in one?s sexual fantasy. The child has no sexual feelings. It is child abuse, pure and simple. I hope she rots in jail along with her membership patrons. JMHO :Oh crap

Fantasy or not, I believe the owner of the website was not exercising her freedom of speech but catering to child abuse and making money.

I think you are forgetting that a baby has no say or pleasure getting finger fuck or whatever...at least a puppy or kitten or any animal can fight back being young, but human baby can't.

Amazes me that you would be so stupid and continue to fight for THIS. cheers :)

Are you also against books/movies with child murder in them, or do you support the murdering of children?

If you support the right of authors and movie makers to put fake murder in their movies, then you must support mudering children, right? :1orglaugh

Murder is the worst crime a person can do according to U.S. law, so how can you support fake murder but say that fake abuse must be punished?

Some people here need to stop being emotional and start thinking logically.

You don't put someone in jail because their words offend you.

There is a very simple line and it is the one that even the U.S. supreme court drew in the "virtual child porn" ruling. The line is whether or not an actual human being is being used or harmed in the production of the material.

If there is no real child, then it is not child porn.

Once you cross that line, then everything, including mainstream movies and video games, should be banned because they "might cause someone to do something illegal".

Supporting free speech means supporting speech that offends you.

You do understand the term FICTION right ? You aren't one of those people who watch TV and want to buy a gun to shoot one of the actors because you think they are the 'character' are you ?

Some GFY member think that fake movies and stories about abusing kids should be banned, but if the author would have just written about killing kids, that would have been fine. :(

I understand fiction very well, and if I saw a TV show broadcasting a segment on insersting 'whatever' in a baby for ones' self pleasure, I would cancell my cable.

Some of you don't get it. A baby has no sexual feeling. The site owner was crossing the line. Nothing is wrong about role playing amoung adults. :)

edit: think about it

But you think it's ok to have movies where babies are killed on your cable?

Think about it.

SureFire, I'm just making sure you understand the difference between REAL and FICTION. You kept talking about a real baby. There IS NOT one. It's like getting outraged over a Soap Opera character getting raped, and yet.. it never really happened in the first place. It's FICTIONAL. It's not real. It did not involve real people. It was a THOUGHT in someone's head that got written down.

Do all you guys that are defending this girls rights to publish stories about fucking infants 6 months old have kids of your own?

If you do have kids, would you want to send him to a school where his teacher was a member of this site?

Would you want your kids going to a summer camp where his camp counselor was a member of this site?

I can't understand the logic behind defending these kinds of stories that to my sense of morals are so far over the edge and clear cut obscene.

Please explain what I'm missing here.

KRL, do you want your kids teacher or camp counselor to be a member of Lightspeed sites ? How about a regular member of Ogrish or ConsumptionJunction ?

I wouldn't want to send my kids to a teacher who's a conservative. What's that have to do with anything? Stories about illegal conduct involving children should be illegal as well because someone's teacher might read them? As far as I know, no link has ever been shown between reading a story or playing a video game and an increased propensity to commit the act that wasn't funded by the Heritage Foundation or Focus on the Family.

What you're missing is that pixels can't commit a crime. Thoughts about evil things aren't crimes. You are not the thought police. I DO NOT WANT thought police in my country.

You don't think these stories should be legal? I'm sure someone else doesn't think a story that involves killing people should be legal. I'm sure George Bush doesn't think stories that criticize the government should be legal.

This is the United States. If you want to live in a country where the government controls what you read, think and watch go to Red China. Leave this country for those who can appreciate the freedoms we're supposed to have guaranteed to us.

What's funny is that all this hysteria about child abuse started not all that long ago and led to massive arrests of innocent people. As soon as the TV started telling people there were child molestors around every corner every daycare provider in the world was dragged into court. It's a fake issue used by the govt to restrict your freedoms, just like the propaganda about the 'explosion' of huge jury awards (McDonald's having to pay millions because their coffee was too hot etc) is being used to reduce the ability of individuals to sue corporations. Now all the little sheep think every unmarried man wants to fuck babies and every corporation is in danger of going bankrupt because of out of control trial lawyers. It goes on and on and on. People never learn.

I don't have a problem with those sites compared to this one.

Yes this is the United States and its not a free for all country. We have rules and laws and there are lines in the sands that can be drawn by the majority.

I guarantee you if this issue was put to a nationwide vote the people defending this site would be countable compareable to the hundreds of millions that would be against it.

Well, you saw what happened the last 2 times the nation put something to a vote. :1orglaugh It wouldn't surprise me if they voted to shut your porn sites down and toss you in jail too.

Interesting that you didn't have a problem with Ogrish or ConsumptionJunction or Lightspeed sites being viewed by your children's teacher or summer camp counselor though. Yet you supported throwing NTFU in jail for his war/porn forum.

A majority would probably throw you in jail for running a porn site. So go turn yourself in. :1orglaugh

You support the right to fictional child murder and yet you are attacking those who support the right to other fictional free speech?

How can you support fictional child murder if you say this has to do with "having kids"?

Wouldn't you be more worried about fictional killing of kids than fictional abuse?

300 anti-free speech porn producers! :1orglaugh

Start with John Stuart Mill's 'On Liberty'. Educate yourself as to the implications of the actions you're so fervently advocating. Then come back and give us a more knowledgeable opinion on this topic.

"In this essay Mill also warns of a second danger to liberty, which democracies are prone to, namely, the tyranny of the majority. In a representative democracy, if you can control the majority (and get them to vote for, and elect, your candidates) then you can control everyone (because your candidates, once "democratically elected", will pass whatever laws are needed for this, as was done by Hitler's agents in the 1930s in Nazi Germany and seems to be happening today in the U.S.A.)."

http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/jsmill.htm

Someone post a poll for both arrests. I'm curious to see how everyone here would vote.

It doesn't matter how everyone would vote. Everyone in this country gets to do their own thing as long as they're not hurting anyone else, no matter how unpopular it is with the moral majority. That's the whole point. Are you really this thick?

If I saw any show abusing a baby in a sexual way, yes; they have no sexual feelings which is child abuse.

I know where to draw the line, do you? I dare you or anyone to post a gallery of babies being finger fucked or write a fantasy to your partner accounts. :)

you're too fucking stupid to deserve any other reply than this one :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

I don't know where you live dig, but in most states in the US, if in your own house you possess CP, heroin, bomb making substances, loaded weapons left where a child could access them, etc. you are subject to arrest and jail time.

So the argument that everyone gets to do there own thing isn't valid, so if anyone is thick bro, it ain't me.

Funny how you're comparing a loaded weapon, Heroin and a bomb to a text file.

Something in this set doesn't belong. Can you tell which one?

I agree. Probably a kid that cant see the difference between " actual pictuires" and " stories"...
I am happy I don't have to stay in this business much longuer.

Tell it to the judge . . .

I think below indicates how you can't do anything you want in the privacy of your home.


In September, when news reports of the site began to surface, Wilson insisted that because the site actually is hosted in Amsterdam, he was not violating any laws in Polk County.

"Nice try," Brad Copley, a prosecutor with the State Attorney's Office, who specializes in obscenity and sex crime cases, said Friday night. "He's in charge of the Web site. He lives here. He's operating from his house. It doesn't matter where his server is."

So a story is CP? The pixels are sentient beings who were molested and abused?

How can it be child abuse when there's no child involved? Anyway, the point isn't about protecting stories of sex with children. It's about protecting the right of the individual in this society to say what he wants whenever he wants as long as he isn't actually harming someone. It's why the ACLU protects Nazi marchers just as strongly as they protect the most extreme liberal groups. When you say we have freedom of speech, you don't get to pick and choose which speech is ok. Either it's all ok or you have to let the government pick and choose who can say what, where they'll say it and when it can be said. That is totalitarianism. You're not as intelligent as I thought you were, that's for sure, but surely you're intelligent enough to do a little reading on the subject instead of just saying "Pedos are bad" over and over again.

Bomb making substances.

http://imagescommerce.bcentral.com/m...e-magnet-a.jpg

bottle

http://atlantzone.free.fr/jeu/objets...s/zoom-rag.jpg

rag

http://www.toolweb.com/pics/BTZ50833.jpg

gas

amazon sells books on how to make bombs that is put out by the United States Military.

looks like we are all subject to arrest at any time.

Tell it to the judge huh? Now *I* should be arrested too eh? You think people should be arrested for sitting in their own house, by themselves, reading about stuff of which you don't approve.

You're just not worth this many keystrokes. Good night.

this thread has spun out of control












































































































































































































..




























































































































































-------------Bottom Line = Support free speech even when you disagree with it

Some great arguments on both sides in this thread, but you know.. it's almost a waste of time because the conditioned emotional response is blinding. My last post in this thread will be some notes about ACLU/Nambla/Amazon in response when confronted about selling NAMBLA on it's site, and similiar books.

***

The ACLU, defending NAMBLA, argues the lawsuit is the same as if someone was killed due to the permissive attitude of sex, drugs and rock music, and then sued Rolling Stone magazine for creating a climate in which the murder was possible.

Amazon has stated it does not endorse "Understanding Boys and Boylovers," but insists "people have the right to choose their own reading material."

Law-enforcement agencies say they cannot do much about "written words," emphasizing they deal mostly with trafficking in child pornography. The FBI and local agencies have been trying for years to find NAMBLA in violation of laws against the sexual exploitation of children, and a U.S. Senate committee concluded NAMBLA did not engage in criminal activity.

***

So a new day is dawning. How far will it go ? I guess we're finding out.

Pictures of CP and fantasty stories about CP produce the same effect and involve the same subject matter.

What you guys are arguing is like saying here's a some drugs visible on the table and there are some drugs hidden inside a box.

If text files about CP aren't CP then what are they?

I'm not trying to be an argumentative asswipe, just trying to legally analyze this case cause apparently we've got a wide rift in opinions on this one and no one is even close to seeing the others viewpoint.

Apparently this concept is just waaaaay too esoteric for KRL to comprehend. He wants you to 'tell it to the judge'.

Digital images are formed by 1 and 0's.

Text files are formed by 1 and 0's.

Both file types are viewed by using your eyes.

Images are displayed on a screen using pixels.

Text is displayed on a screen using pixels.


WTF? Am I stupid and missing something here??

i think everyone should watch this funny joke before going to sleep tonight

http://www.ifilm.com/player/?ifilmId...ize=default%22

whats funny is, people sit and argue on a board while this is on mainstream.

jokes about sex with children will be on sale at amazon dvd when this movie comes out.

enjoy.

They're text files. Is a story about rape an actual rape? Is a movie where someone gets killed an actual murder?

This isn't a large mental gap to bridge, and if you haven't bridged it by now you're never going to.