Is it wrong to view child pornography?

Agrote, it turned out, was merely looking for an ethical loophole that would allow him to conform to society's condemnation of child pornography in general while still viewing it himself in practice. His was an inherently dishonest position that had little to do with a desire to redefine the way we look at child porn and a great deal to do with his desire to indulge his own perversions with a clear conscience.

In fairness, before something is categorized as being "ridiculous" its advocate
shoud be given the opportunity to express his justification.

In fairness, before something is categorized as being "ridiculous" its advocate
shoud be given the opportunity to express his justification.

it has been awhile, be we have had drawn out debate on this matter at A2K....what it boils down to is that the advocates of criminalization can not make any connection between the porn and damage to that child, that they are claiming that all children are in danger of being damaged because allegedly a guy who looks at pics of children is more likely to violate a child. This is in spite of evidence that looking at porn takes the edge off the itch, so they are actually less likely to feel the need to violate a child. They still want the child to be able to sue for civil damages however, because the reality is that what they really want is an excuse to use the hammer on people that they dont like.

We have the same debate about porn and the damaging of women, and in particular games such as Rapelay, where those who want to criminalize it claim that it will prompt men to want to rape women, but they can come up with no proof, only theories which rely on the assumption that men suck and can not be trusted.

yet child abuse , still happens , alot

where is the dishonesty? Looking for permission or a way to do what we want to do is something that we do everyday, all of us. I think highly of a person who feels the need to clear the bar of collective morality before they pursue their passions, such a person is much less dangerous than is the person who lies about what they are doing and does not care what anyone else thinks.

You should be giving Agrote back slaps for being a decent guy rather than slamming him as dishonest.

Another thing that sinks the advocates is that they refuse to back down from making criminals out of people who take pics of their two year olds in the bathtub. This is insane. Looking at naked pictures of people does not in any way indicate a desire to violate people. Looking at pics of kids being sexual in an unnatural way MIGHT be, but we must remember that most of what the state calls child porn and a criminal matter are pics of kids either lightly dressed or naked acting like kids. The perception is that child porn is like my XXX dvd's but with kids instead of adults doing the sex, which is 1000 miles from what the state calls child porn most of the time.

hyp·o·crit·i·cal  [hip-uh-krit-i-kuhl] Show IPA
adjective
1.
of the nature of hypocrisy, or pretense of having virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that one does not actually possess: The parent who has a “do what I say and not what I do” attitude can appear hypocritical to a child.
2.
possessing the characteristics of hypocrisy: Isn't a politician hypocritical for talking about human dignity while voting against reasonable social programs?

its not about what is legal and whats not for goodness sake

its not about what is legal and whats not for goodness sake

It is for me, because my main interest in the matter is the state continuing to push into my personal space with the sex law portion of the criminal code, with the state abuse of the citizen in the project to craft human behavior as the prudes desire it to be conducted.

There was no dishonesty that we know of with Agrote, no claiming of one thing when he believes another that we are aware of. What it boils down to is that he insisted that he is a moral person and based upon what he likes you insist that he is not..... you are claiming that his appetite by definition makes him immoral, which shows that you dont understand the definition of immorality.

so its about you then

NOT on the health and well-being of the child involved

He wanted a rule that said "child pornography is wrong," but he also wanted to be able to say "but in my case, I'll make an exception." Yet he never explained to anyone's satisfaction -- except, perhaps, his own -- why an exception should have been made in his case.

Agrote wasn't trying to "clear the bar of collective morality," he was trying to find a way to sneak under that bar. He didn't want society to stop condemning child porn, he simply wanted to find an exception that would apply to him. My problem with Agrote , therefore, was not that he was a pedophile, it was that he was a hypocritical pedophile.

He wanted a rule that said "child pornography is wrong," but he also wanted to be able to say "but in my case, I'll make an exception." Yet he never explained to anyone's satisfaction -- except, perhaps, his own -- why an exception should have been made in his case.

For the last time, I no longer think that the viewing of child porn is okay. I'm sorry, but I happen to be an open-minded person and I happen to have been convinced by some of the arguments against my former position. I don't understand why nobody is pleased that I've stopped holding the views that made you so angry in the first place.

were they filming it?

That's not how I remember it. I remember him arguing that being a pedophile is not a choice and that merely consuming CP was not unethical as long as the viewer harmed no children. He extended this ethical position to mean not paying for it and thereby not funding it but merely consuming it.