Going straight for the loaded question and making extra assumptions? nice.

the issue with it isn't just in itself, but the fact that there's no way to make it without abuse.

> So you don't believe child porn should be illegal?

The Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse strike again!

It's a serious question - can you answer it?

If you believe nothing should be censored, then you believe child porn shouldn't be censored, so please either square that circle, or weaken the argument to "I believe this thing shouldn't be censored"

Child abuse is already illegal. Law enforcement tracks down creator? Good. Court orders website owner to take down material? Good. ISP preemptively decides what to block? Bad.

CP is often used as an "I win" card in this kind of arguments, as it can stir up emotions in the general public, in favor of ever expanding scope of surveillance and censorship. We should be extra aware of this.

You still haven't answered the question that I actually asked.

I didn't say "should child abuse be illegal?". I said "should child porn be illegal?".

You said it's good if a court orders the website owner to block the material, i.e. censors it, so I assume you're pro-censorship for child porn and likely also support jail time for those who possess it.

In which case, please do not claim to oppose all censorship.