(June 11, 2015 at 8:03 pm)Dystopia Wrote:It is very much is about self determination which is the argument I used then.(June 11, 2015 at 7:52 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: I'll go with material harm since that's easiest to prove in a court of law.
We've had this argument before re. assisted suicide and the right to die, so I don't expect to agree with you.
Almost a year ago - I'm much more liberal with assisted suicide now (and euthanasia) but it isn't about that
(June 11, 2015 at 8:03 pm)Dystopia Wrote: I'm just asking you how do you define "material" harm? Let me ask a troubling question - Should an individual be allowed to keep, download and watch child porn as long as they don't sell or participate in it (assuming a priori that child porn is always illegal to film)?
To define, this best describes what I consider material harm: Harm means any injury, loss or damage. It can also be any material or tangible detriment. (source)
By viewing and keeping child pornography, they are participating in something that has a demonstrable material harm to the children involved, unless you're arguing that no material harm is done to the children (who can't even legally consent) in the child porn (i hate to use the term) industry. You think I wouldn't have a problem with that?
Thief and assassin for hire. Member in good standing of the Rogues Guild.
