The government can not criminalize the private possession of child pornography, so long as it is AI-generated. That is the new precedent set after Steven Anderegg was dismissed of one of four charges after investigators found him in possession of hundreds of AI-generated sexually explicit images depicting children. Due to the decades-old Supreme Court ruling, which rejected restrictions on sexualized depictions of fictional children when real children were not involved, the court was forced to protect the in-home possession of AI-generated child-sex abuse material. Despite Anderegg being charged with producing and distributing AI child porn, a federal court did dismiss the possession charge on First Amendment grounds. The Justice Department appealed the dismissal, but was unsuccessful, as the government cannot generally criminalize the private possession of obscene material inside someone’s home, unless it is sexual abuse material involving real children. However, as AI content has become more lifelike, real children and fake children can now be virtually indistinguishable from each other. As time goes on, more predators and pedophiles will likely use the excuse that their child pornography is AI-generated as a way to escape punishment, as certain child porn is now classified as free speech. This situation is abhorrent, as whether or not real children are being depicted and abused in this content, it is still seriously damaging to not only the children, but those watching and possessing it as well. AI cannot create anything original; it can only replicate what it sees online, meaning that any AI-generated content will be a replica of real videos of kids, whose likeness will be used to make sickening content. Moreover, if AI child porn is permissible, those that consume it will be less likely to be subject to punishment and more likely to perpetrate acts of sexual violence on real children in the real world. This whole case is abominable, and there is no reason why child sexual abuse should fall under the First Amendment, whether it be real kids or not.
By Alexandra Miskewitz
Blaming Western countries and civilization for the world’s tragedies and inequalities is common among progressives on virtually every issue, and environmental protection is no exception. The United States and countries in the European Union are widely criticized for their high ecological footprints and greenhouse gas emissions but the methodologies used to calculate their environmental damages are likely severely flawed. This becomes apparent when they are compared to many non-Western countries, whose cultural norms have led to massive pollution, environmental destruction, and inefficient resource usage that plague their lands’ sustainability. The governments’ reluctance to encourage their citizens to become more environmentally conscious implies that these patterns are not the result of European colonialism, no matter how much leftists use it as a scapegoat. A simple visit to India shatters the anti-Western narrative. Indian rivers have been filled with trash and sewage due to local manufacturers’ dumping their waste without regard for those that rely on those same water sources. In addition, despite India’s per capita waste generation being magnitudes lower than that of western countries, its lack of sanitation facilities and failure to enforce laws on waste removal have resulted in landfills of plastic waste that line streets throughout most of its cities. Climate activists regularly scrutinize the use of natural gas or coal-powered plants for electricity generation in the United States, but the air pollution generated from those is miniscule per energy unit in comparison to power generators widely used in Indian households. This is widely due to catalytic reduction and desulfurization processes required by American law on power plants, which successfully controls air pollution in the United States. In contrast, Indian cities’ air regularly ranks among the most polluted in the world due to generators that lack these filtration processes, costing Indians billions of dollars each year in healthcare. Yet environmentalists are strangely silent on urging India to become more sustainable. Capitalism is often blamed for environmental catastrophes, despite the tendency of many high-performing countries on the Index of Economic Freedom to have strict regulations on asbestos, carbon taxes, pesticide use, and nuclear power plant safety. In contrast, the communist USSR was responsible for the destruction of the Aral Sea, some of the world’s most polluted mining towns, and the Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster. Despite the Chinese Communist Party’s strong grip over the national economy, it has failed to control smog and air pollution from the rapid industrialization that has occurred in the 21st century. In addition to these pollutions, two communist states suffered from major famines. were exporting vast quantities of grain while tens of millions starved to death. When the behaviors tolerated by these countries are ignored by climate activists, the question rises: Is their movement more about sustaining the planet for our descendants, or tearing down Western civilization and capitalism, which have produced the most affluent and environmentally conscious countries in human history?
By Edward Kim
If every plank and sail is replaced in the Ship of Theseus, does it assume a new identity? If the specific wood and fabrics are of different types for the replacement parts, most would say yes. Applying this logic on a larger scale, what happens to a country once its population’s composition becomes radically altered through immigration? In the 21st century, immigration to the United States has reached all-time highs, often from regions whose institutions and cultures are strongly different, such as India, the Middle East, and Africa. As this influx continues, and these immigrant communities gain political influence as sizable voting blocs, the descendants of those who founded America will have less of a say in the future of their country. Will America continue to be the same country that it was just a century ago if this happens or will it assume a new identity?
By Edward Kim
Follow Us