The debate regarding pornography is simple; people either agree porn is a form of free speech or a violation of woman’s integrity. Pornography is similar to other hot topic debates, such as politics, abortion, smoking in public, and religion. Everyone has an opinion, yet no one’s opinion is “more right” or “more wrong” than anyone else’s. This topic is one people choose to avoid discussing. Either you are for it, or you are against it. Rarely is there a gray area where one is undecided on the topic.
Most people however, agree that child pornography crosses the line into an area few are willing to go. When it comes to harming a child, for another’s sexual pleasure the line in the sand is clearly visible. Many who feel pornography maybe gross, but to each his or her own choosing, will quickly state that child pornography is unacceptable.
The invention of the internet has revealed a host of new problems. Problems that no one could ever have imagined and problems with which no one has ever dealt with before. These new problems will continue to pop-up (no pun intended) and require a close look by experts as each one occurs. New laws and new ideas on how to deal with the dark side of cyberspace continue to develop, as the internet increasingly intertwines and invades our daily lives.
What was surprising was to realize that on the World Wide Web exists both virtual pornography and virtual child pornography. Once again, the topic of virtual pornography is mute on this forum. The author does not believe it is healthy and does not believe it serves a function other than to lead a journey down the wrong path. The writer’s concern on this forum remains focused on the exploitation of children, real or imagined. The subject of virtual child pornography went to the United States Supreme Court back in 1992.
Surprisingly, the Supreme Court decided virtual child pornography was legal. The child pornography laws are designed to protect children from harm or exploitation in the production of child pornography. The laws are also to prevent sexual offenders who get sexual gratification or sexually excited by seeing pornographic images of children from acquiring actual pictures of children to prevent them from acting out their sexual desires.
The Supreme Court decided virtual child pornography is not child pornography since no child or children were actually, physically harmed, or photographed to make the pictures. The big problem lies in the fact no one can tell the difference between one the virtual child porn and two the real child porn. I do not expect people who look at child pornography and are excited by the sexual images of children will care whether it is a real child or virtual child in the picture.
In the end, regardless of what kind of child pornography the U.S. Supreme Court has deemed acceptable, even virtual child pornography places every child at risk. Whether the real deal or not, child pornography plays into the dark sexual fantasies of adults having sexual relationships with children and that places children around that person in harms way. Nothing good can come from virtual child pornography; it should be illegal, just like real child pornography.