Reasonable limits...
People keep talking about those, and then they only apply them when they feel they are necessary - only when they apply to the cases that they want them to apply to.
Case in point: an article from the NY Times I saw on AOL recently. It was about a
(man I consider a)dirtbag who's been posting pictures (fully clothed, but still inappropriate, considering what accompanies them) of young children on his web site. A site that was shut down recently by its host, but that he plans to restart the function of with a foreign host. Dutch, I believe.
This is the first time I've seen a Californian Liberal (in recent history) complain about a child-related pervert. Most of the time they claim that we're either violating the rights of those animals or that we're falsely accusing them. No matter what our reasons are, they say, we have no right to protest their actions.
Suddenly, now that they are being directly affected, it's become an important issue to them. When it involves East Coast parties, then it is acceptable to claim that the police have 'falsely accused' the parties involved - and when a man like this starts doing online postings about 'trolling' for children on the West Coast, it is 'unacceptable' and 'inappropriate'.
Make up your minds, folks. Either do what's right and support all the kids, or support the people who damage our children in the name of their own pleasure.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment