Re: Sex & Violence
I wasn't referring to your comments about furries, only to your comment about a person who has fantasies about children but does not act on them.
Why are they completely different? Both would cause massive harm if acted upon, and neither can possibly cause any harm at all if not acted upon. What's the difference?
Sure, but unfortunately your responsibility doesn't end there. You also have a responsibility to ensure that your "moral compass" actually makes logical sense. It doesn't have to be consistent with anyone else's compass, but it does have to be logically self-consistent. If it isn't, you have a responsibility to do something about it. (Unless your compass tells you that hypocritical double-standards are acceptable; I guess then it's okay).
I submit to you that it does not make logical sense to dissaprove of or have negative feelings towards something which cannot, by definition, ever cause harm to anyone. (The "something" in question being fantasies that a person never acts on, regardless of the target of the fantasy).
|