Why should simulated murder be legal, but simulated child porn be illegal?
476703
have children of your own and then grandchildren, and see if you can still be so liberal. child porn is for sickos, we must protect our children in all cases. yes, even simulated.
391305
They do tend to ruin far more lives than one-time murderers.. so, no, they shouldn't get the same punishment.  Pervs deserve a much harsher punishment.  And, if you look up the laws and cases involving murders of children, you'll be upset to know that if you kill a kid, here in TX, anyhow, you'll probably only be charged with "injury to a child"...  don't know why but it's easier to kill a kid and get off than for killing an adult..  The law is wrong!
178822
Because there's so many devils in the world & the net gives them easier access. They can get to kids they might otherwise couldn't have. The death penalty would be too easy, make them suffer!!  It's about time they did something about the perverts on the net!!
109468
Because the First Amendment protects free speech – which covers expressions/performance of all kinds.  \n\nAlthough some may find porn objectionable, the freedom of making such expression or performance is protected - although restricted (no public sex/nudity, etc.)  Also, any such "performance" by actors under 18 is strictly prohibited.  It's a crime for recording/making such "performance", as well as selling and owning any child porn materials.  \n\nProstitution, however, is not protected anywhere in the Constitution, and all states outlawed such a profession.  Granted it’s still sex for money, but the difference is that prostitution is selling sex, while making porn is selling a performance (like acting).  The same principle also applies to strip bars.  \n\nFinally, since profits from prostitution are not taxed, they are essentially tax evasion.  Where as porn actors still pay taxes like everyone else.
17932
First Amendment jurisprduence tightly restricts Congress from enacting such regulations.  The Supreme Court has articulated a test in a case called Miller, which states that obscenity is unprotected, but requires it to meet three qualifications: First, the average person, applying community standards, considering the work as a whole, finds that the work appeals to the prurient interest; second, the work is a patently offensive depiction, applying community standards, of sexual conduct, as defined specifically by law; and third, as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.  That's a lot of burdens for Congress to reach, and it often includes too much protected speech when trying to identify obscenity.\n\nThe Court allowed restrictions on child pornography, too, in Ferber, so long as the work, first, visually depicts minors, who, second, are engaged in sexual acts lewdly exhibiting their genitals.  The Court later interpreted this prohibition as only concerned with the well-being of children in the creation of pornography, not the fostering of child molesters, and so virtual child pornography was found protected, so long as no children were actually harmed.\n\nIt seems like the Supreme Court is currently protecting a lot under the First Amendment, even things that seems pretty dangerous or pretty valueless.  Congress will have its work cut out to try to pass better regulations that can pass the Court's scrutiny.
104110
Hey dude\nMovies also show people committing murders ! If you can believe that these people are really murdered during the filming, then you can also believe the 'sex' scenes being real too !\n..It is all a 'make-believe' illusion, buddy.
919087
The only problem I'd have with state executions of pedophiles is making certain that errors weren't made.  Usually, the people best positioned to determine guilt or innocence are those who are nearest to the crime when it happens, who saw it, or saw the immediate evidence of it.\n\nI'd be in favor of the summary execution of pedophiles by eyewitnesses to pedophilia crimes.  I'm less in favor of executions by state judicial processes because lawyers and liars and political favoritism are certain to let half the guilty go free and are also certain to unjustly execute some number of innocent people.\n\nAny politicized government process, judicial or otherwise, always becomes corrupt sooner or later, and once corrupted the "cure" becomes worse than the "disease."
481357
There is a correlation when a copy  cat crime happens.\nAlso, when the internet is offering violent games there could be related incident to a crime.  Kindest regards.
1093986
Well crimes in child pornography are taken very seriously. I was doing research for my job and came across an actual manual for officers dealing witht the release of sex offenders. For his crime I don't think that you are obligated to tell the neighborhood. The manual's pretty long but if you just skim thru it you'll see the hierarchy listing.
823968
Modern American law spends a LOT of time dancing on the head of a pin. There's legal killing, and then there's murder. The girl committed murder. And while the abortionist did essentially the same thing, our society has window-dressed it so that the child is not 'legally' a 'person' until the head pops out. Which is why they are so careful to make sure that doesn't happen. \n\nIt's all just sophistry, and it's not going to fool God. These people WILL answer for their crimes, eventually.
1031913
it's illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to open, download, or otherwise use the material (images, DVD's, ect) from a web site that contains porn.\n\nIt's also illegal for anyone over 18 to allow anyone under the age of 18 to view an adults only web site.\n\nIf convicted, violators can be jailed, lose their pc, and / or prohibited from using the internet, especially if they happen to be an ISP.
339051
why does it have to be illegal?
990670
I TOTALLY agree! How do ppl think that this should be allowed???? Murder is outlawed... This is MURDER! Isn't it? I mean they ain't killin' them they're murdering them BIG difference! Killing: is ok cuz they did somethin wrong; killing is justice Murdering: is bad cuz it's ending an innocent life!\n\nI don't care if the mom can't take care of it! Hmm... Have they ever heard the word adoption?
924878
This is what juries are for.\n\nIt is stupid and dangerous to take pictures of nude children that include their private parts with or without consent, with the possible exception of one's own children (even that has led to threats of prosecution -- stupid but true).
877562
porn is legal. what goes on between consenting adults is no one elses business.\n\nkby\n\n.
31431
Yes, I agree that it should always be illegal.  The number of cases where the mothers life is in danger is miniscule in comparison to when it is not.  I have been there and gone through with it.  I regret it.  A lot.  Thankfully, I have a Savior who is forgiving........
578240
Rent porn and fantasize.  Having sex with children is wrong and illegal.