[Ramius]

Calm down... of course child porn is disgusting.

What the SC decided, and rightly so, is that for something to be-- in fact-- child porn, it needs to therefore involve children. If it doesn't involve children... it isn't. It's not really a tough concept.

How old is someone in a cartoon, anyway?

So if a girl that is, say, 21 years of age dresses up in pigtails and a plaid skirt wants to sell pictures of herself as a catholic schoolgirl pretending to be one... but everybody involved knows it isn't really the case...

While it may be morally vacant you're saying it should be worthy of jail time?

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

How old is someone in a cartoon, anyway?

Virtual child porn is not a cartoon!! Why is everybody playing dumb?!

Please don't respond to this. I refuse to talk to somebody who calls virtual child porn a cartoon.

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

While it [virtual child porn] may be morally vacant, you're saying it should be worthy of jail time?

Did I? Where did I say that?

I think a mental hospital would be more appropriate. However, I think this kind of mental disease is untreatable. Once you're that mentally ill, there's no cure.