TL;DR Censorship is bad, Exo is wrong
Exodrake is wholeheartedly wrong. Human existence is not a sustainable thing. Animals do not adapt at how quick we are to destroy. Think of the governmental implications alone within the past 100 years. The Caspian tiger was exterminated by the Russians because they wanted the space. Avians are most likely to go extinct, mammals seem to be the second most vulnerable. In the past 500 years we've said goodbye to well over 1,000 animal species that we know of, and there may have been even more casualties along the way. It's accelerated to a point where human growth is beginning to far outgrow several animal species, specifically mammals.
Saying that it's the fault of the Great Plains Buffalo for not 'adapting' is callous. It isn't a bleeding heart thing, its a preservation issue. Insects, specifically honey bees, are beginning to become damaged as time goes on. We've seen hundreds of bee farms bite the dust within the last ten years. Insects themselves are vital to human survival.
Trust me, no one is ever going to forget how to make another human, yet we lack the capability of preserving a 'lesser' species. If we can't preserve what we have already, it spells a certain foreboding doom that won't be seen until, of course, it's too late.
They also don't take polychlorinated biphenyls as a factor either. Plastics don't break down fast enough, and at the molecular level, at all. Creating an item that doesn't break down into a foreign environment is... foolish.
////
On the articles of censorship: again, if you love digital or fake pornography fine. I can't consider these people as paedophiles simply because they have yet to harm any actual human being, however, once you cross that line it then becomes an issue. Real people are harmed through real photos. It makes it that more difficult to find the real villains when people are picking up cartoons and telling you they're criminals. How do you even slog through it when you're stopped and ordered to redirect your attention to yet another cartoon collecting crook.
My view of censorship comes in the form of "I have no idea what is going on, please explain to me" and receiving a big box of otherwise sanitized documents. Censoring games and film because they are violent (think of Australia's censoring laws) or pornography because 'urine/femcum' or small boobies. Jane Patten had this to say about Australia's 'small boobies ban'
Now, as fascinating as discussing pornography is I feel that I need to backpedal a bit and state that censorship due to perceived slights is a misuse of power (to prevent sounding like a perv). Censoring a movie or a game or a book for grotesque violence, despite it being wholly fictional, is doing a disservice to yourself. I recall Stephen King's book Rage being dropped from circulation because someone drew 'inspiration' from the book and went on a spree killing. Now, does a book spur someone to kill another human being? Of course not. The seeds of dissent were there already to begin with. What about videogames and movies? No correlation has been found between violence that is fictional and actual criminality.
People have been killing people since before recorded history. Censorship isn't just about pornography, it takes place in books and film. If someone then has the power to decide what you see, what you consume, what you experience then you're not doing so much thinking. Censorship is what enabled dictatorships and governments throughout history to come to prominence. Propaganda and censorship fall in the same vein and I don't particularly like either.
Now, does this mean that preventing a child from seeing someone's head stoved in is wrong? No, and neither is it wrong to prevent a kid from seeing something no one should have to see. Seeing real violence is mentally scarring and the smell never leaves you. Real death is a nightmare.