Federal Case May Redefine Child Porn

Cnet News ^ | 11/30/2006 | Declan McCullagh

[mamelukesabre]

Maybe my parents are guilty of child porn then. Somewhere they have old pictures of me in the bathtub.

[Dallas59]

But they didn't post it on the web stating you were "hot" and "sexy" and I'm sure you didn't pose with your legs apart with lipstick and eye liner.

[mamelukesabre]

Ok thats gross. Are you telling me that's what these pics are?

[Dallas59]

See post #42.

[backtothestreets]

"Well, let's just establish an elite corps of "sexual thought police" and be done with it then."

Being the federal government is composed of a wide array of people with dissimilar views and values, it will seldom strike a good cord with all. Most often the federal government settles for lower standards of respectability and decency in an effort to accommodate the greatest number of people, but in so doing it has allowed small numbers of citizens to run roughshod over the majority. Such was not the case before the US Supreme Court stripped citizens, states and local governments of their constitutional right to make laws on religion, speech, press and assembly.

While it would not please the anything goes crowd, most people are generally good, moral, and possess a good sense of what constitutes and establishes decency and respectable behavior. I would trust citizens to establish better standards than the federal government.