Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: muir_redwoods
The firmest basis for laws against Child porn is that children are unable to give informed consent or contract legally. Since no children were actually used in the creation of these disgusting images, it's hard to see how this law will stand.

While your rationale is sound, it is not the only one used when various governments form their child pornography laws.

In Canada not only are depictions of sex with 'simulated' children, which includes anime, considered child porn, but even text - stories of sex with or between children is also.

17 posted on 03/11/2006 4:23:29 AM PST by Northern Alliance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Northern Alliance
"In Canada not only are depictions of sex with 'simulated' children, which includes anime, considered child porn, but even text - stories of sex with or between children is also."

And I repeat, that is a weak basis for a law. We had a fellow here who was on parole for a child-molestation charge. As a condition of parole, he was not to possess child-porn (duh!)but he was found with a diary filled with his own written musings on sex with children. He was arrested for a parole violation and it was held up at trial. On appeal he was freed because, essentially, a person's diary is simply a repository (in this case a septic tank) of one's own thoughts and one is free to think what one will.

Key to this decision was the absence of any real children in any aspect of the offending material.

19 posted on 03/11/2006 4:35:56 AM PST by muir_redwoods (Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson