"From personal experience, I've seen an actual predator (as in actively seeking out children for sex) be defended for 'just having a fetish'."

As someone who greatly values freedom as long as the freedom isn't harming others, I think it's important to get some empirical data before we start promoting censorship based on anecdotes.
I have a question about your anecdote: how did you determine that the motivation to defend the predator came about due to drawings of underage ponies? Is it not also a possibility that the defender was already mentally ill or had some critical lack of moral education?


"Common sense would also dictate that giving these people a safe place to discuss their 'fetish' will promote acceptance of foalcon and attraction to minors as being harmless. A lot of people may only see it as a fun taboo, but trust me, plenty of people also see it as way more than that."

Is this common sense actually sense, though?
There's a vast amount of media that contains horrible and immoral acts such as violence, torture, and murder. Do we also take it on common sense that allowing this media to exist is going to encourage people to become or accept murderers? Do we take it on common sense that ALL cartoon pony porn needs to be scrubbed from existence because it will encourage people to rape actual horses? And if the answer is no to these, how did you come to the conclusion that foalcon is the exception?

I hope it's clear I'm not trying to brush this topic off or take it lightly. If foalcon does indeed do demonstrable harm, it's extremely important that everyone takes appropriate action. But I will reserve my belief and actions until I have a good reason to believe there is a link between the media and the crime.