>wait until they find out people draw porn of western cartoons, including the simpsons
They wouldn't care because it's American, my country is big cucks for the US but becoming very anti-Japanese. I suspect Australia is the same, they want anti-Japanese sanctions but can't justify it so they paint Japan as devils for the sheep masses. It's an old tactic right from the nationalist playbook.
>it's really just conservatives being assholes because they don't like something and can get away with shitting on others
Yes, true. Anyone who call themselves progressive but want censorship of art or obscenity laws or such are useful idiots for conservatives at best, or conservatives in the closet at worst.
>it never stops at loli/shota and it sure as fuck isn't because of concern for real kids, these fucks prove how little they care with all the shit they pull
This is also true. What they want is to more strictly punish their opponents for less than they get punished for more. For non-conservatives it is very obvious that raping a child is worse than fapping to a photograph of a child and that fapping to a photograph of a child is worse than fapping to a drawing of a child... but for the conservative mind, these things are the opposite. It's all about control, and the idea that "once you put one toe in the water, you may as well dive in the deep end". That all crimes are equal, and everything "immoral" must be a crime. Then they can make an argument from immorality as an excuse:
>"your honour, I was led astray from the path of morality and law by lewd drawings of fictional characters... I could not control myself, and so I am not to blame for raping a child... instead the artist who drew those lewd drawings of underage fictional characters is to blame"
Sadly this argument often works, because people are idiots. I'm glad in my country it's not yet like this with drawings, but punishments for CP are harder than for child våldtäkt. Punishments for several våldtäkts can be lesser than for one våldtäkt. Punishments for raping a child are lesser than for raping an adult. It's all because in the conservative mind, "once you put one toe in the water, you may as well dive in the deep end" and they see "honour" in committing several crimes.
It's awful, they really don't care about children like you also say. They want to stop children from having a carefree childhood, so why should they be believed when they say they want to "protect children" by banning lewd drawings of underage fictional characters? They shouldn't, and it's only a matter of time before every country passes the same laws on this because it's easy. It's so much easier to ban drawings, than to catch actual child predators and save actual children from abusers.
>conservatives are all for "small government" until something happens that they don't like
Yes, exactly. It's the same on every issue.
>how can they tell it's you if you're using a proxy?
I'm not sure how it works, but that isn't what the problem is. The problem is, if you wanted to protest against illegal blockings with evidence that sites are blocked illegally (the only legal reasons to block sites are if they contain CP or pro-terrorism) you'd be exposing yourself as a proxy user accessing blocked sites. Using a proxy itself isn't illegal here, but it is explicitly illegal to access blocked sites with a proxy. So to protest against illegal blocks, you have to expose yourself as breaking the law. Of course they can't arrest you for accessing illegally blocked sites with a proxy because the sites don't actually contain anything illegal, but for most people a warning like "this site is blocked for CP/terrorism and attempting to circumvent the block is illegal and will lead to prosecution" is instant NOPE NOPE NOPE and clearing history as if it does something.