• DaDragon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d say it’s because the person you’re replying to rightfully sees it as a slippery slope. If you say this fake image that didn’t directly harm anyone is illegal, what’s to stop you from saying some other fake image that’s much more in line with social tastes is also illegal? Ie an artwork made of human shit, for example. Most people would be repulsed by that. But it doesn’t change the fact that it could be art. As long as it doesn’t concretely harm someone, it’s hard to equate it to said harm.

    • sugartits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s child porn.

      Child. Pornography.

      It is not “Art”.

      The slippery slope is people like you confusing the two and trying to somehow justify CP as free speech/art.

      I don’t care how it is made. There is a line. This crosses it. Simple as that.