Reply #58: Actually, they clearly ARE [View All]

[Xithras]

The validity of laws against child pornography have been challenged, and their validity has been upheld because the government always falls back onto one indisputable point. You cannot produce child pornography without harming a child, which is a crime. That makes the pornography a "fruit" of the original crime.

It is not illegal to be a pedophile or to be physically attracted to girls under 18. It IS illegal to act on those impulses. It IS illegal to take photos of a child under 18. It IS illegal to have copies of the photos created during that crime.

Human generated child-porn, on the other hand, has no original victim. Whether rendered on a computer or painted on a canvas, the image comes from the artists imagination only. That makes it an expression of an artistic idea, and protected speech. With no victim in its creation, there is no valid legal argument for its prohibition.

When it comes right down to it, I'd MUCH rather have pedophiles spanking themselves to pictures of fake girls than to real ones. At least no children were hurt that way.