While we generally support critical discussion of the law, we do have some ground rules on this topic:

• Members may not advocate for legalizing pedophilic relationships or activities, including inappropriate sharing of nude photos or sexual role play.
• Members may not advocacte legalization of child pornography featuring actual children.  (The topic of fiction or AI-generated content can be discussed from a perspective of "what should the law be?")

We also can't allow this site to become a de-facto support group for pedophiles, as some of the support methods may be illegal and/or harmful to children accidentally.  As such, we issue the following guidance:

• If you feel pedophilic urges, you may state that you feel urges that would be inappropriate to act on and ask for advice, but cannot specifically state that the issue is pedophilia.  You can state that you feel attraction toward someone who does not want that kind of relationship, you can state that it would violate your religious values, you can name any more general reason why the relationship would be a bad idea, but you can't specifically state that the issue is pedophilia.
• If you were sexually abused as a child, you are allowed to discuss it, as long as appropriate spoiler tags are applied and keep it in the 18+ forum.  If you do not have access to the 18+ forum and think that you should, please message or email a staff member.

For our younger members, the rules are more lenient, as your actions/the advice you receive is less likely to result in harm to others:

• If you feel enilikaphilic urges, you may mention the issue and look for ways to avoid getting into a forbidden relationship.  However, you may not ask for advice on how to get into such a relationship, nor is anyone allowed to advise you to get into a romantic or sexual relationship under the circumstances.  Do note that any sexually explicit or implicit content should be properly labeled and spoilered (and placed in the 17- forum if it is explicit).
• If you feel an adult may be romantically or sexually pursuing you, you may discuss the matter to ask for advice on how to proceed and keep yourself safe.
• If you feel an adult may have touched you inappropriately, you may discuss it in the 17- forum.  This applies even if the contact was over your clothes.  We don't want this site to be the sort of place adults can go to read inappropriate stories of inappropriate things that happened to younger members.

General forbidden narratives on the Israel/Palestine conflict:

"Israel is a White/European/Western colony."  Israel is not the colony of any other country or group of countries.  Israel was formed as part of the subdivision of the Ottoman Empire, and has the same legitimacy as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen, Jordan, and other countries.

"Zionism is about Jews subjugating Arabs."  Zionism is about granting the Jews of Israel the same right to self-determination that various Arab ethnicities were granted with the breakup of the Ottoman Empire.  Arabs in Israel have full citizenship, and while there are significant civil rights issues, attempting to make those issues the focus of the conflict is dishonest.

"Palestinians have tried to achieve justice peacefully, but the Israelis wouldn't listen."  This is most commonly used by people trying to claim that justice involves full return of any Arabs who had any ancestors on November 29, 1947 who lived within the boundaries of modern-day Israel.  The people arguing for this conveniently ignore that it is only Arabs who wish to live peacefully in a Jewish country who are supposed to return according to UN resolution 194 on the issue, that the majority of Palestinians in Palestine have been raised in a culture that delegitimizes Israel, and that no country would allow the immigration of so many people who want to see that country overthrown.  At no point has the Palestinian leadership pursued a legitimately peaceful resolution to the conflict (including recognition of Israel's legitimacy and cracking down on all terrorism efforts from within its borders, and seeking appropriate monetary compensation for displaced Arabs of 1948 rather than mass return.)

"Palestine used to be an Arab country. Look at this map of Palestine from the 1920's, and this coin from the 1920's that says 'Palestine' on it.  It was an Arab country before and should be restored that way, without Israel."  The British mandate of Palestine from 1918 to 1948 was not the same polity as the Arab country of Palestine that declared independence in 1988.  The Palestine of 1918-1948 was essentially "Region whose future governance will be decided later," and what made it unique was its high Jewish population.  The word "Palestine" at the time actually bore Jewish connotations, much like the word "Israel" currently does.  Any attempt to delegitimize Israel is forbidden.

"When people are occupied, resistance is justified.  Palestinian militias have the right to violently strike Israelis until they no longer have any control over Palestinians."  Palestinian militias have been stockpiling weapons, firing at any Israelis they can reach.  The Palestinian leadership has a responsibility to prevent this from happening.  Instead, they have been enabling and encouraging it.  Israel has every right to enforce those rules that Palestine has been ignoring.  Israel has made it clear that the occupation will end when the threat of violence ends.  That was the arrangement in Oslo in 1993, which the Palestinian leadership followed up with the second intifada, and that was the arrangement with the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza n 2005, which the Palestinian leadership followed up with rocket attacks on Israel.

"The inciting incident to this conflict was the Nakhba, an unprovoked act of aggression."  Let's clarify some timing.  The Nakhba did not begin until after December 2, 1947, when the Arab High Council (the entity that was slated to become the government of the Arab State of Palestine had the partition plan been enacted) essentially declared war in response to the decision to establish a Jewish State.  That war included a siege of many Jewish neighborhoods and some major cities.  The displacement of Arabs from Arab villages was to prevent a similar number of Jews from being massacred, and was thus a legitimate necessary military action.  What is a problem is Israel's continued refusal to compensate the displaced Arabs for the damages they received during the war.  The Nakhba was neither unprovoked nor the inciting incident.

"Israel is trying to force all Palestinian Arabs from their homes and take it over for themselves."  Ever since withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, Israel has never tried to build Jewish settlements in Gaza, and ever since the 1993 Oslo agreement where each neighborhood of the West Bank was classified as part of area A, B, or C, (with the latter being largely open area as opposed to the urban centers of areas A and B) Israel has never attempted to expand a settlement into areas A or B.  Israel has stuck to its part of the Oslo agreement (meant to be a first phase of the peace process) but Palestinian leadership did not do its part to prevent terrorism.

"Israel has some major civil rights problems, therefore Arab resistance is justified."  First of all, Israel's racial civil rights problems pale in comparison to Palestine's.  Second of all, civil rights violations are not grounds for changing which ethnicity is in charge of a country.

"Israel has the right to permanent governance of the West Bank and Gaza because Jews are the indigenous people of that land."  No amount of indigeneity or grants Israel the right to deny Arab self-governance of the land that belongs to them in accordance with UN resolutions 194 and 242.

"Israel is the only country that the global community will not allow to conquer land after winning a war."  Outside the Cold War, the global community has been consistent in denying the right of conquest.  (Consider the responses to Russia annexing Crimea in 2014 and other parts of Ukraine since 2022.)

"There are no innocent Palestinians, the thousands of Palestinian civilian casualties are a plus, not a minus."  Collective capital punishment is never okay.  While you can argue that the civilian casualties are a cost that is outweighed by the benefit of working toward overthrowing Hamas, you must acknowledge the civilian death toll as a cost.

Forbidden narratives on the October 7th attacks and the ensuing Israel-Hamas war:

"Israel is committing genocide in Gaza."  To be classified as a genocide, an operation must have the goal and/or effect of significantly reducing the population in question.  Israel has been taking precautions to direct civilians out of harm's way, and the civilian/combatant ratio is among the best in modern urban warfare.

"Israel's military campaign is a war crime."  As mentioned, Israel has been taking precautions to direct civilians out of harm's way, and the civilian/combatant ratio is among the best in modern urban warfare.

"Here are some documented cases of soldiers/battalions abusing their power and committing war crimes.  Israel is the bad guy here."  Just because a few soldiers are committing war crimes, that does not mean the entire operation should cease.  Looking at the top-line numbers, Israel's military campaign is well within the range of what is to be expected in standard urban warfare.

"Israel is trying to starve Gazans."  That is not true.  All aid entering Gaza needs to be inspected to make sure donors are not smuggling in weapons or the materials to make them.  Despite this, a recent UN report found no evidence of famine, that all estimates indicate that more than enough food in entering Gaza, and that while the fog of war makes it difficult to tell specifically what is happening, this also means that any organization that claims to have specific data that indicate a clear famine is likely fabricating those data, or at a minimum using flimsy assumptions.

"Israel's goal is not to eliminate terrorism from Gaza, it's trying to conquer Gaza."  There has been no attempt to build Israeli settlements in Gaza during this war (excluding that one time when dozens of Israeli citizens ran across the border illegally, tried to erect illegal temporary homes, and the Israeli army and police removed them all within a few hours.)  On the contrary, the Israeli government has been trying to work with Arab countries to try to establish an Arab leadership force in Gaza capable of keeping Hamas at bay.

"Israel should resettle Gaza, settlements bring security." Military presence brings security.  Settlements are a blatant violation of the fourth Geneva convention, which, among other things, prohibits transferring your own population into a country you're occupying.

Posts and statements made on ACF which promote the above forbidden ideologies, including ones which give cherry-picked facts that would realistically lead readers to agree with those ideologies, will be removed.

To clarify, neither congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez nor the other panel organizers made antisemitic comments at the event.  Instead, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) objected to her stating that there comes a point where criticism of Israel can become antisemitic.  As indicated by this position, it seems the DSA (which was staunchly Zionist in the 1970's, for whatever it's worth) views any legitimization of Israel as bigoted, and all delegitimization of Israel as righteous, making the DSA an antisemitic organization.

That being said, it is still permissible to post in support of the DSA (just not in support of the bigoted positions they are supporting on this one topic.)  Below is the set of guidelines regarding how statements about bigoted politicians/groups are to be viewed by the staff:

For currently serving, aspiring, or recently unseated politicians or political parties:

Politicians and political parties couldn't be single-issue groups if they wanted to.  They'll have to make decisions regarding tax structure, the education system, upkeep of the road system, etc, whether or not those issues are at the fronts of candidates' minds when they run for office.  Both voting decisions and party affiliation are decisions based on assessing a large number of factors, and neither a candidate nor a party is expected to be perfect.  That being said, expressing support for a politician's specific position on a specific issue may be grounds for the post containing that support to be censored, if the position in question violates the terms of service.

For historical politicians:

If a member starts expressing support for Adolph Hitler or Jefferson Davis, that's another matter, for the following reason:  Those two politicians are out of office and primarily known for single issues, with their positions on those issues blatantly violating the terms of service.  For historical politicians, the rule becomes that members may not support historical politicians whose primary legacy was a bigoted one.

For non-party political groups:

These groups include the aforementioned DSA, the Proud Boys, Greenpeace, Take Charge Minnesota, etc.

Similar to the rule regarding historical politicians, the rule regarding non-party political groups is that members may not support any groups that are primarily known for bigoted positions.

As some examples/non-examples:

The Democratic Socialists of America are largely known for their economic positions.  Supporting them is fine.

The Proud Boys are largely known as a White supremacist organization.  Members cannot support this group.

Greenpeace is primarily known for its environmental activism.  While they do engage in illegal ecoterrorism, this is not what most people think of when they hear the name "Greenpeace".  Supporting Greenpeace is fine, though if members are asked if they support ecoterrorism, they are not allowed to say that they do.

Take Charge Minnesota is an organization largely known for advocating that Black Americans lead better, more productive, healthier lives, and asserts that most Black/White racial disparity would disappear if most Black people lived such lives.  (Take Charge Minnesota is a largely Black organization.)  Take Charge Minnesota also advocates that strengthening commitment to one's faith is a step toward a healthy life.  While their views are not in line with those of most Black Americans, and most Black Americans would argue that their positions understate the impact of institutional impediments toward Black American success, there's nothing wrong with promoting healthier lifestyles for Black Americans that are believed to lead to better Black American economic success and longer Black American life expectancy.

An important note on ACF policy regarding Take Charge Minnesota:  We still don't have a clear set of guidelines on when criticism of differences in Black vs. White American lifestyles becomes racism.  ACF policy on Take Charge Minnesota is tentative by nature, and may change once such a set of guidelines is presented.  

First, a clarification on the definition of Zionism in its contemporary (post-WWI) political context:

In the aftermath of WWI, when the racist Ottoman Empire (with its numerous laws restricting the right of non-Muslims, comparable to the Jim Crow Southern United States) was being subdivided, the question arose "should the region with a Jewish majority, which had until now been subjugated, become its own state, as the Ottoman Empire is being subdivided along tribal/ethnic boundaries?"  Zionism was first the belief that yes, that subdivision should have happened, and then in November 1947 when the decision was made to create the Jewish State of Israel alongside the numerous Arab states, the belief that this was the right decision and that Israel should not be destroyed.

The antonym to Zionism is commonly known as "Arab rejectionism," though when non-Arabs voice the opinion it may be more accurate to describe it as "Anti-Zionism."  

To be clear, Anti-Zionism is an inherently racist ideology, analogous to Americans who support drawing congressional district boundaries to minimize the number of Black and Hispanic members of government, or claiming that non-White people should not be citizens as their grandparents are from another continent.

If a member voices opposition to Zionism, or speak of Zionism in a derogatory manner, we will ask xem to clarify that xe does not actually oppose the formation of and continued existence of Israel as a Jewish country, clarifying any common misconceptions xe may have or refuting any misinformation about Israel's principles and existence.  Failure to comply with the terms of service will merit the censorship/deletion of the post, and in extreme cases where the member's only role as an ACF member is to promote such ideologies, possibly expulsion of the member from ACF.

Of course, this policy is subject to change over time, especially as new moderators join the team.

Wikipedia defines fascism as:

a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

Several of these items contradict the terms of service:

• Ultranationalism--Rather than simple nationalism which seeks to maintain the sovereignty of a nation, ultranationalism promotes the control over other nations (often via violent coercion, according to Wikipedia).  As such, supporting ultranationalism is tantamount to supporting terror groups, and is forbidden.
• Belief in a natural social hierarchy--By its nature, this constitutes a disparaging statement against whichever groups are supposedly at the lower end of this hierarchy.
• Subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race--By its nature, this is a call for collective punishment of those outside the nation and race.

If a member voices support for fascism, we will ask xem to clarify that whatever political system xe supports does not actually include the above three topics.  Failure to comply with the terms of service will merit the censorship/deletion of the post, and in extreme cases where the member's only role as an ACF member is to promote such ideologies, possibly expulsion of the member from ACF.

Of course, this policy is subject to change over time, especially as new moderators join the team.