quote: Oh, and I just realized that the methods of acquiring said images would be hurtful to children? Well, yeah. You think a 9 yr old's anus is going to be able to accomodate an adult penis or other large object? Granted this may not always be what would happen, but in many cases where it is an adult and a child, many things will quite possibly be painful, unless done to a unconscious child, which makes it not okay on other levels anyways. quote: There are also gray areas where you can get nude images of children in pseudo-sexual situations, but are legal because there is nothing explicit. There are a few sites out there that have this stuff. Mostly scans of European mags that are legal due to the wording of the law, and their artistic photography, rather than smutty pix. quote: In summary, child pornography should be illegal only when a child is harmed. People should be free to view whatever they wish, as long as it doesn't involve harming anyone else and in this particular case, it does not. I concur. It's just the defining of harm that gets in the way. I myself (I'm thinking many people will change their view of me for this) have a small collection of such types of pictures. Not one picture contains a sexual scene. But they are all nude. Most are actually quite "tasteful", somewhat like Playboy used to be (I say used to because IIRC, Playboy has begun to show more crotch and such. Not just T&A in classy scenes anymore). quote: BECAUSE ITS FUCKING SICK!!!

IF ONE OF MY CHILDREN WAS VICTIMIZED THIS WAY I'D HUNT THE PERP DOWN AND IMPOSE A MOST MEDIVAL DEATH ON THEIR ASS!!! Hmm, yes, and what about those well developed teenage girls you looked at? Perhaps not all of them were even teenaged yet? I once knew a girl when I was 14. She was 12. She was developed to a point where she could put highschool girls to shame, so to speak. She had all the attributes of an adult woman. (I also knew of a 9 yr old that was developed enough to give the illusion of being teenage. It's quite insane really.) Are you going to tell me that you don't/wouldn't look at such things? If so, it is possible you would be telling the truth, but you'd be one hell of an exception.

In any case, those beautiful girls you looked at are someone elses daughter as well. Yet you had fleeting thoughts of knowing the girl yourself. Please come down from that hypocritical high horse and think. If you are going to be so heavy handed about someone else lusting after your own daughter, you'd better start minding your own ogling of other's daughters. This goes for all men, myself included. I personally feel that the age laws are lame anyways. Granted I'd say having sex with someone that is around 12 or under (or perhaps even a little older) should be against the law no matter what based on the changes happening around that time (leading to vulnerability and manipulation), and in the case of younger than 12, just simply not being anatomically ready for such things, but beyond that, it's pointless to have laws.

Most all men I know look at younger girls, and were it not for laws, would likely try having a go at the girl. Morals are fine and great, but are man made (or, if you are a religious person, god made). This isn't the dark ages folks. We are not prudes. We seeth with sexuality. As long as no one is being hurt, and can make the call for themselves what they want, there should be no laws governing it. http://www.ageofconsent.com Just to be sure it is clear to everyone, I am definitely against rape/manipulation and other ways of obtaining sex. The only way I could be okay with sex with anyone of any age is with consent and full awareness. No drugs, no alcohol, and such. I've never been a big fan of any of it. [This message was edited by Red_Chaos1 on July 14, 2001 at 22:08.]