[Notary Sojac]

I think there are two facets of the kiddie porn question on which conservatives can disagree.

First, the issue of punishment. If the law on the books for possession of kiddie porn is ten years' jail time, then if the prisoner completes his ten years, he has served his time and is entitled to be released. I have a major problem with additional, unofficial confinement based on psychological evaluations or anything else other than recidivism. Want 'em to do life without parole?? Then the American way is to change the law.

Second, my definition of child pornography is material which depicts the sexual exploitation of actual human beings below the age of consent. A novel that describes sex with children, or artwork portraying what is purported to be sex with children, are distasteful in the extreme, but if no actual child was involved, it's not child pornography.

[GeronL]

I don’t think I agree with some of that

[little jeremiah]

Any literature, photos, live action, artwork or any other media which uses children - real or fictitious - in a sexual manner, is disgusting and until the Supreme Court (leftist at the time), porn producers and the ACLU decided that “free speech” mean pornography and obscenity were protected, none of the above would see the light of day.

Anyone who thinks that literature or any media that uses real or fictitious children in a sexual manner is fine is sick in the head and morally blind.