What happens when credit processors make it impossible to pay artists for lolisho stuff? What then?

society heals

>>937923738 (OP)
they'll never, if the end of the system is money - it will stop the artists

The thing I hate about this is that I know I'm right: there's no way to objectively classify that stuff as "illegal" and therefore if someone wants to pay for it then they're paying for something lawful.

But you can't actually ARGUE that because by doing so people immediately toss out the merit based on the content. There's no way to argue artistic freedom if the subject is something unpalatable to the audience you're making the point to. Not only will you be disregarded but incur serious reputational damage in the process, even though no line was actually crossed.

"Rules for thee, not for me." I should be allowed to pay for rape games but you're asking for smut of the Rowdyruff Boys? Degeneracy, get fucked and neck yourself.

>>937925886
You might type like you're intellectual but if you don't understand that all laws are subjective, then you're a retard no matter how you write. If law is passed that makes it illegal or interpreted as illegal it is unlawful.

>>937927734
I can accept that but the law needs to exist in order to be enforced. That law doesn't exist where I live nor can the criteria be satisfactorily defined.

If I'm paying someone for content that has never been legislated against then why am I out of my rights to do so? Why can the payment processor I'm going through say it's not going to happen, even though the claim is that "anyone doing lawful business will be permitted to use our services"?