You don’t need to put your glasses on to see what’s coming next in the march of progress:
The one-year mandatory minimum jail sentences for accessing or possessing child sexual abuse and exploitation materials are unconstitutional, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled…
Fittingly, the ruling came out on Halloween.
The justices don’t like it that mandatory minimums “remove judges’ discretion to impose sentences other than imprisonment when appropriate.” Like a stern talking-to, for example.
They greased the skids for a trip down the slippery slope with a hypothetical:
In deciding the appeal, the Supreme Court examined a scenario in which an 18-year-old receives via cellphone, from his friend of the same age, an explicit photo of the friend’s 17-year-old girlfriend.
The recipient keeps the image on his cellphone and looks at the photo briefly, knowing that it constitutes child pornography.
A year in prison for that would be “grossly disproportionate,” so out goes the mandatory minimum. The imaginary case serves as the thin edge of the wedge.
As for real cases, as Ken Ham notes,
It’s worth noting that such a hypothetical is not what was in question with the case that made it all the way to the Supreme Court. Rather, it was a case involving two men possessing “hundreds of images of children as young as three being severely abused.”
At this point, the destigmatization of child sexual abuse seems as inevitable as it is horrifying. Ham continues:
I’ve been saying for years that pedophilia is the next sexual sin to be normalized, because if people are “born this way” and sexual desires are neither good nor bad and just an innate part of who you are, then who can tell a pedophile that his “natural attraction” is wrong? It’s the logical application of the LGBTQ worldview.
Stand by for the cancelation of pedophobes whose careers get destroyed due to their failure to affirm.
On a tip from abcanc.