[Inkie]

That is fine when you are dealing with adults. When it comes to living with the consequences of your actions, if the consequences of, say, kiddie porn, are that some pervert rapes and murders children, then the innocent child is bearing the consequences of the kiddie porn producer/viewer. While I agree on the government sticking to the Constitution, this is one case where the Constitution is not specific. I am sure that in, say, The Federalist Papers, there is some kind of discussion about freedoms being limited to where they do not hurt others.

While you might say there is no proof that kiddie porn leads to other crimes, we are accumulating evidence. Every time there is one of these murders, we are finding the killer has enjoyed kiddie porn. Besides vicimizing children in the making of the porn, there appear to be other consequences, that is, people making their fantasies a reality.

I am NOT talking about porn depicting freely choosing adults, being viewed by adults. Surely, protecting of little children from being murdered -- as opposed to protecting them from a Big Mac or second-hand-smoke -- (the original topic of this thread is the murder of a six-year-old) has to be a priority.

[ClancyJ]

Good post - I agree. The ones fighting so hard for acceptance for pornography are part of the downward turn of this culture - the acceptance and promotion of evil.

How convenient to hide it behind upholding the constitution. I often wonder if those proponents are already involved in pornography and it has a hold on them - either addiction, enjoyment or money.

No matter their reasons - it is trash, it is destructive. How can a person involved in child porn find any release for his desires - other than with a real child? That is what is wrong with it period.

All of this talk about parents protecting their children. What about doing it by getting rid of child porn?