If you're going to weigh in about child porn, you really need to articulate your position, which, BTW, I believe infers that you believe child porn should be legalised. Quite frankly, I would assume you are a Libertarian by how you defend your positions, but the official Libertarian position is not to legalize child porn, which I agree with. Now, if your agenda is to hide behind the Libertarian model of individual rights in order to protect personal fetishes, you will never state as such. So, giving you way more benefit of the doubt on the subject than anyone probably deserves (you injected
your position into public dominion), whenever this comes up, give your *qualified* answer, i.e., 'Yes, child porn should be legalised
because ...or no, it should not be legalised because...'. Anything else offends sensibilities and you will ultimately be posting back and forth to marktwain and no one else.
Posts like this
You can use your fascistic tactics all you want. Reagan was a socialist and I still think that making the posession of "child porn" illegal is actually harming more children then it is saving. truly are too vague and quite frankly infer an opinion which is offensive to a civilized society (which you are entitled to). However, you then must understand that such a mindset undermines every other debate you enter. It's the can of worms you, yourself, opened.
Very well stated. :-)