@o8o Of course. Abusers of real children should be thrown into a prison, as well as those who spread the recordings of such acts, as demand for such photos and videos only encourages the underground industry.
However, I still must point out of that the statement: "The ultimate goal is to achieve a society that does not tolerate acts that turn children into sexual objects of desire" sounds like defining a thought crime. A society that does not tolerate any acts that victimise children sexually should be the goal. However, your original statement means that a person who dreams of children sexually but never in their life even approaches a child or downloads any criminal materials from the net would nonetheless be a criminal. Because dreaming would already be an act, even though it has zero impact outside of the person's own brain and there are no victims whatsoever. Thus, I will never condone such broad statements with no restrictions. It's no different from banning hate, for example, which seems to be all the rage among certain groups of people and politicians. Even though hate is an evolutionary product that has been with humans since the species has existed, there are people who say you shouldn't be allowed to hate anyone. And these people are among the top level politicians in too many countries. I have no doubt these same people are also behind the 2D loli art bans.
In short, I will never accept laws that ban thoughts and feelings, I will only accept laws that ban real acts with victims or very plausible victims, which is why I have nothing against reasonable gun laws, for example, or the requirement for a driver's license to be allowed to drive a car, with all the jazz that goes with it.
Still, I'm a fair person, and I could accept all of these bans if in return practicing politics was banned as well.