And yet didn’t look real enough for that person to stop and render aid (hmmm contemplate that for a second, our “concerned citizen” that left without rendering any aid). And even if it looked real, even if it was Tom Savini real there’s still a massive difference between that and a depiction of graphic sex.
Obvious you can’t understand that a dude under a lawnmower has no relationship whatsoever to porn. Every time you throw around that graphic sex line (like a dozen times so far in the thread) you rely on fallacy. Logic shows it’s just silly Halloween display.
There could be a reason for that, but feel free to besmirch the person's integrity without grounds if you like.
And even if it looked real, even if it was Tom Savini real there’s still a massive difference between that and a depiction of graphic sex.
People in the neighborhood should not have to be subjected to either graphic sex or blood and gore in clear view in their neighbor's yard.
Obvious you can’t understand that a dude under a lawnmower has no relationship whatsoever to porn.
So you would obviously say that it was okay for a kid to view a movie full of blood and gore, but not a movie with sex in it. Gotcha.
And people wonder why kids are so screwed up these days.