Magazine article Insight on the News

Court Decision on Virtual Child Porn Draws Debate. (Correspondence)

Magazine article Insight on the News

Court Decision on Virtual Child Porn Draws Debate. (Correspondence)

Article excerpt

Thank God for someone who is making sense. I was about to give up on all humankind until reading the column by Paul M. Rodriguez on "Virtual Child Porn's Very Real Consequences" [the last word, May 27].

When I remarked about the stupidity of the Supreme Court's decision that virtual child porn is protected by the Constitution, a male coworker said that the high court was correct--that this stuff is only cartoons and not pornography. That same coworker is becoming a new daddy. I want to see if his attitude will change now.

 
Karen Foster 
via the Internet 

I totally agree with your column on child porn. I felt helpless and sickened when I first read the news regarding the Supreme Court ruling.

Something that was not considered is the claim that virtual images of children do not use real children as their source. In fact they do, morphing them to disguise the artifice.

Virtual images and their components/textures are indeed based upon real pictures of children--images captured, disassembled and categorized to be used later at the artist's command. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.