Quote:
Originally posted by eroswebmaster
Sorry Fletch but I think it is you who needs to read this law a bit more.
They were not speaking of just "CP, just made in Photoshop."
The law referrs to 18+ models pretending they are younger
computer graphic images of people who do not even exists.
a bad cut and paste job of a little girls head on a grown woman's body
literary works
you could not write fictional erotic stories that involved children.
Now however distasteful it might be for someone to write a fictional erotic story involving children...should we be throwing maybe the Next Nabokov and his own attempt at Lolita into the slammer?
You say that hollywood movies are going to be done in a "societally accepted manor."
Well I think that should scare you...that society is going to get to judge what is accepted and what is not..when even in Los Angeles you better not sale a movie involving fisting.
We're not talking about anything "real" here....only fantasies...and once we start trying to legislate what goes on in the brains of our citizenry...then fuck that I'm outta here.
I'm on my way to Belize 
|
Hmm Eris, I just woke up so I am in no way shape after this week to debate hehehe... you are 100% right, I should read mroe regarding this... I was only saying before people place a judgement against CP laws they should read more...
I wasnt saying I knew it all bro, not after this week,... I dont know anything anymore.
All I know if CP whether fantasized or real is wrong. And thats my opinion.
You are disagreeing with me that Hollywood movies are made societally accepted?
I am only following the definition of Obscene material bro... I dont play in the gray line and am totally against CP whether its drawn, dreampt about, or coloring books. Its wrong.
All I was referring to about Societally accepted was...
http://www.adultweblaw.com/laws/obscene.htm
-------------------------------------------
The current definition of obscenity requires the application of a three-part test enunciated by the Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973). Under the so-called "Miller Test," a jury from the jurisdiction where an obscenity charge is brought will decide whether the content in question is obscene by asking:
"(a) whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."
------------------------------------------------------------
So I think as I said it still stands.
Society will NOT accept a pic of a 13 year old photoshopped into a naked 13 year old. But they will accept Phoebe Cates tits, in a movie...which once I thought about her tits, I lost my train of thought anyway so my statements could be considered null.
C/mon man, I dont feel like arguing.
