FA+
Shop
cub porn... (bet ill cause drama now)
15 years ago
ok first off, i know nothing about the TOS on cub porn but heres my arguement... (i also dont know if theres something going on about it, i just heard it third hand that something was up)
"Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech," and imposing a criminal sanction on protected speech is a "stark example of speech suppression." At the same time, sexual abuse of children "is a most serious crime and an act repugnant to the moral instincts of a decent people." "Congress may pass valid laws to protect children from abuse, and it has."
people who want it banned answer me this: are there any REAL children being abused? any REAL children? no, none, they are DRAWINGS and/or STORIES, ITS NOT REAL! therefor, laws protecting AGAINST child porn cant apply here, drawings and stories can be considered free speech, and since congress cant make laws against free speech, neither can anyone else in this country, so the ToS TECHNICALLY cant ban cub pronz... keep in mind however i DONT support cub porn, but i also have nothing against it... if i did i would be a hypocrite why? think about it, i HATE gore/blood porn... but i cant say its bad and try getting it banned becuase i dont like it... just like people who dont like cub porn shouldnt be allowd to say "im offended that you let that on this site, take it down!" you shouldnt be allowd to ban something because one group of people dislike something, then turn around and let something else be uploaded when another group doesnt like it... it makes no sense... plus add to our little argument, lets assume for one second that i upload a picture and i mark it adult because say its a cub in a loaded diaper, thats not porn, but its marked as such, are you gunna tell me i cant do THAT now too? in short... cub porn SHOULD be allowd on FA (again though i dont personally support it, but i have nothing agaisnt it)
EDIT: and i just read the ToS thing about no half animal stuff like nekos... why? and does that mean we can no longer upload TFs of people into animals now?
"Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech," and imposing a criminal sanction on protected speech is a "stark example of speech suppression." At the same time, sexual abuse of children "is a most serious crime and an act repugnant to the moral instincts of a decent people." "Congress may pass valid laws to protect children from abuse, and it has."
people who want it banned answer me this: are there any REAL children being abused? any REAL children? no, none, they are DRAWINGS and/or STORIES, ITS NOT REAL! therefor, laws protecting AGAINST child porn cant apply here, drawings and stories can be considered free speech, and since congress cant make laws against free speech, neither can anyone else in this country, so the ToS TECHNICALLY cant ban cub pronz... keep in mind however i DONT support cub porn, but i also have nothing against it... if i did i would be a hypocrite why? think about it, i HATE gore/blood porn... but i cant say its bad and try getting it banned becuase i dont like it... just like people who dont like cub porn shouldnt be allowd to say "im offended that you let that on this site, take it down!" you shouldnt be allowd to ban something because one group of people dislike something, then turn around and let something else be uploaded when another group doesnt like it... it makes no sense... plus add to our little argument, lets assume for one second that i upload a picture and i mark it adult because say its a cub in a loaded diaper, thats not porn, but its marked as such, are you gunna tell me i cant do THAT now too? in short... cub porn SHOULD be allowd on FA (again though i dont personally support it, but i have nothing agaisnt it)
EDIT: and i just read the ToS thing about no half animal stuff like nekos... why? and does that mean we can no longer upload TFs of people into animals now?
The bold clearly states that it's illegal... BUT, here's what made me laugh! The line that says 'However, that ruling actually said that images that did involve the use of real minors in their production could not be prosecuted as "child pornography.'
Heh, kind of counterproductive if you ask me, but, this is how it ties into the FA AUP thing I think. They're getting rid of lolli that appears to be similar to humans because they have no way of knowing if someone posed for such art, which is a huge concern. If someone drew a human or human-like child nude, one might question where the anatomy study came from, as in, did he actually look at a child to do this?
Of course, the chances of that happening, very slim. Thing is, it -IS- a possibility and to have such a legal case would tear FA down quickly. If they lost, they'd loose money and FA would probably be forced to go down. If they won a case, they'd be known as the guys who said it's ok to draw porn of children. Bad publicity as a whole really... and lets face it. History has proven that when our children become evolved in any situation, the whole nation will turn to see it.
So, I guess that's just my theory on it. I'm not one for shota or lolli, but like you, I do agree in being fair about it. Not just to the babyfurs who like cub porn, but also to the FA staff.
people can draw and write whatever the hell they want. won't bother me.
Loli/Shota
Fur Affinity does not permit illustrated images of human/proto-human minors in mature situations (aka "loli" and "shota") to be uploaded to the site. "Proto-human" is defined as elves, dwarves or neko-style characters (otherwise fully human characters with the addition of ears, tails or paws).
I like cub porn, and
THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT RIGHT.