The Instigator
mostlogical
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Stensson
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Should "Child Porn" Be Legal?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/9/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,425 times Debate No: 79563
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (34)
Votes (0)

 

mostlogical

Pro

I (Pro) will argue why "child porn" should be legal.
My opponent (Con) must argue why it should be illegal.

ROUND 1 IS ACCEPTANCE ONLY!!

Good luck
Stensson

Con

I accept
Good luck
Debate Round No. 1
mostlogical

Pro

First, I want you to know I'm not a child molester or anything like what Fudge_Packer said in the comments section. I'd like to draw your attention to the fact he didn't even wait until I shared my view before making that disgusting comment about me - He believes if you think child porn should be legal, it means you sexually assault children. Unfortunately it seems many men have the same level of intelligence as him and are eager to express their hatred towards paedophiles solely because of who they're sexually attracted to. They think they can beat and kill pedos, and get away with it because child porn is vile and illegal, see video below. Surely this hatred should be discouraged?

https://www.youtube.com...

(at 4:40 man admits he'd kill a paedophile if he saw one)


I've never viewed child porn and would very much like to keep it that way! The trouble is it's possible to come across porn sites while not even searching for them. I'm not going to place a link here, but I assure you if you go on a normal legal porn site you'll be required to click on a button to confirm you're 18+ to enter. This may seem insufficient especially when these websites often display images that can encourage younger people to lie, however it lets people take responsibility, and minimizes their risk. Compare that with child pornsites - I'm not sure what they look like but it's logical to assume that because they're illegal they will NOT give viewers a button to confirm they're 18+ meaning anyone who happens to accidentally find one will see something they'll want erased from their memory! This can ruin their life too.


"the Internet Watch Foundation says it has neither the powers nor the resources to act as a global policeman." [1]


People can't be stopped accessing porn by accident. It would be better if child porn was regulated i.e. legal


Also, would you let girl on left be a pornstar?




sources
[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk...



Stensson

Con

The only reason you provided as to why child porn should be legal is because people will stumble upon illegal child porn anyway. You said it would be better if it was legal and regulated but you didn't give any reasons why that is.

You mentioned that people can accidentally find an illegal child porn site. True, there's all sorts of vile things on the internet that we don't want to see but that's hardly a problem. I can assure you nobody's life is going to be ruined just because they see something they didn't want to see. A reasonable person will simply close the website the second they see child person. So basically this not even close to being a reason why child porn should be legalised.

The child. Honestly I'm astonished that you didn't even mention anything about the child. First off no child will voluntarily want to participate in something like porn. The vast majority of victims of child porn are forced into doing so by manipulation. http://www.popcenter.org...
Almost all of the victims reported various health concerns. Physical such as pain in the genital area. Somatic such as insomnia and loss of appetite and psychological such as depression and anxiety.

Child porn is clearly connected to pedophilia. If you want to legalise child porn then you also have to legalise pedophilia. The reason why pedophilia is illegal is because children are incapable of making sexual decisions for themselves. In other words children are persuaded (read: manipulated) into having sex. That is rape. So the circle brings us to the conclusion that for child porn to be legalised you would also have to legalise rape and rape is an assault.

Child porn promotes child abuse. According to different sources about 70% of child porn offenders have been convicted of child abuse. It also promotes sexual intent that otherwise wouldn't exist.
https://en.wikipedia.org...

Why is the limit 2000 words?
Debate Round No. 2
mostlogical

Pro

Child porn (C.P.) isn't just disgusting to see, it's the biggest online concern; geater than terrorist websites yet most people don't report it. 1.5 million British adults (4% men, 2% women) have stumbled across it [1]

"In the UK... The Protection of Children Act makes it a crime to view images of child pornography irrespective of whether or not images are saved or stored" [2]

It isn't a good idea to type 'kiddie porn' in google for research. In the US, a man's laptop contained 106 images of C.P. in the cache which isn't evidence of knowing pocession yet he was convicted of sexual exploitation of children & jailed [2]

Anyone can be falsely accused of being a pedo and then beat up, killed, lose friends, family, wife, job etc; many stumble on C.P or say dodgy things. Their life can easily be ruined. No-one should be treated unfairly, not even pedos but they are, you'll hear of "paedophile rings" on the news, you won't hear of "homosexual rings". Legalising C.P. benefits everyone.

The girl on left in photo was 19 when it was taken but looks 7 due to rare condition [3]. If women like her became pornstars or wish to be, they'll be discriminated against.

Currently all C.P. is child abuse - why you want it to stay illegal & why 70% of watchers abuse kids. But if it's legal for kids to be filmed having hard or soft sex in licensed studios, regulations can protect & guide them. Pedo's will go to popular sites = less abuse + more reported. Both gay and C.P. are vile but C.P. is more natural as kids can pro-create ~13, and may have sexual feelings at 10.


There's no crime classification for paedophilia, as it's not a crime to be sexually attracted to children.


Sources:

[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...
[2] http://www.theregister.co.uk...
[3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
Stensson

Con

The reason why people are concerned about C.P. is because they feel concerned for the children. It's not because of the bad memories it gives them or what not. From your own source [1] - "Children - many of them too young to go to school - are being seriously sexually abused to make these images which are a stain on our society."

It depends on the country but currently in most cases it is illegal to visit C.P. websites when you have the intention to view it. If one writes "child porn" into the google bar and visits the first porn website then obviously it was fault of the user. If you're familiar with the law then you should use your brain for precautions not to be convicted for searching child porn intentionally. For instance I googled "child porn" due to this debate and the only websites I visited were news articles or wikipedia. People who stumble upon it via redirects - well that's just unfortunate and nothing they did wrong. These things can be proven if needed. Also in your example the man had 106 pictures of child porn on his computer. How can you accidentally download 106 pictures?

Anyone can be falsely accused but that applies to every law quite frankly. Just do your best not to give authorities a reason to believe you're guilty. Legalising it would only raise a number of other problems I mentioned. You don't legalise something just because of false accusations.

The 19 year old girl. Discrimination? Are people with Down syndrome discrimated because they can't get an office job? One's appererance plays a huge role in porn.

I hope you understand that C.P. and pedophilia go hand in hand. Almost all of child porn contains an adult having sex with a child. I'm asking you how do you plan to legalise C.P. without legalising pedophilia and rape. Also legalising it would only make it easier for pedos to find a site which would in turn promote child abuse.

My opponent dropped the harm it causes to the child.
My opponent dropped child porn promoting child abuse.
Debate Round No. 3
34 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by hldemi 1 year ago
hldemi
There you go Stensson !
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
From the FAQ:

"Vote bombing" is when a vote is cast in one or more categories without sufficient supporting reasons in the mandatory Reasons for Decisions (RFD) box. In essence, vote bombing is unfair or unfounded voting."

In this case, the RFD in question solely addressed arguments (in a very vague manner) and nothing else, yet the voter cast their ballot for all 7 points on that basis. That's a vote bomb.
Posted by TalkingWaffle69 1 year ago
TalkingWaffle69
Yeah, some people are not abusing the children themselves, they just watch like that guy you were talking about...but it is still sick and twisted because he might not have contributed to the abuse and rape of the children but he was still getting off on it which is still sick.
Posted by hldemi 1 year ago
hldemi
Define vote bomb.
Posted by Stensson 1 year ago
Stensson
It's one thing to dismiss a vote and a completely different thing to accuse of vote bombing. You would expect the mods to actually have some ground with these things.
Posted by hldemi 1 year ago
hldemi
Stensson go to http://www.debate.org... and under voting section, read what constitutes a valid vote.
Posted by Stensson 1 year ago
Stensson
Vote bomb is this a joke... Where do these people get moderation rights
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Meghannelson// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Con had more logic to back up their logic. They made sense, and really backed up their opinion. Pro didn't have much of a case, and didn't seem to be as prepared. Con was just more clear in their statements, and backed everything up.

[*Reason for removal*] Clearly a vote bomb. The RFD doesn't say anything specific to the debate, doesn't point to a single argument made by either side, and uses strange reasoning like that "Con had more logic to back up their logic". The voter does not explain any of her other point allocations, and does scarce little to explain the argument points.
************************************************************************
Posted by hldemi 1 year ago
hldemi
I have to to encounter a non sexual porn. Would it be something like parents signing the contract to give (for money) their child to some producers that would film their naked bodies while they bath or something ? That would be sick parents to be comfortable to some guy jerking on clips of their kids... Wtf..

Even with legal child porn why would that end child abuse ? Have legal regular porn ended rape ? That is ridiculous.
Posted by mostlogical 1 year ago
mostlogical
Porn does not have to involve sex. If regulations were in place children producing such porn would not be abused and child abuse would end
No votes have been placed for this debate.