>>17379045The legal arguments against this are going to be interesting to read. Naturally no one is going to condone this, but the moral argument is slowly getting picked apart. No one is getting hurt. No one is making money off it. The only real issue is that it "may" promote real life victimization.. but that's a hypothetical. So if we are a morally relative country.. then what are the real arguments against it beside eww, it's icky? I can make plenty of religious arguments on why it shouldn't be allowed, but I don't see how secular humanists can have a problem with it. And since they are the ones that are currently dictating laws, I fully expect them to subscribe to moral relativism and eventually allow this sort of material to proliferate.
