What’s being proposed with this law is that if someone imagines something, draws what they are imagining, and shares it with others a crime has been committed.
At the end of the day though, this is literally criminalizing thoughts. A crime requires harm, and if you can't prove there is a sufficient harm, than you are inherently creating a law solely to restrict a person's free will for the sake of it.
Its not the specific thing that is being target; but rather the principle idea that it is okay to ban any kind of thought crime simply because you find the thought reprehensible; right now its something we can all agree is bad(pedophilia); but we do not have the foresight to see how the precedent such legislation could introduce into the world's legal systems if an initiative was taken seriously.
This is genuinely a slippery slope, and right now its being tackled where it has the weakest footing(with morally questionable items); but that won't be where this ends, we as humans need to act with a cynical level of acceptance that we need to allow some morally questionable things to be legal so that precedent created by illegality cannot be used against us for things that we consider morally right like freedom of speech or thought.
What a helluv comment that is! That's why I reposted it here. Wow, eh?