|
After reviewing the posts here, I'm with the DOJ and FBI on this one. I am surprised anyone would support stories that are clearly over the obscenity line.
What's the difference between writing about CP and images of CP? They are both digital files about CP and both provide visual and sexual stimulation. Words create images even though they are not images themselves. The end result is the same effect. And that is what needs to be considered by the courts.
Its the same thing as if you start saying threats about the president. The secret service would arrest you just for saying the words even if you don't follow through.
Its the same thing as if you were a terrorist with an assembled bomb ready to go and just a bunch of bomb parts and ingredients on a work bench. The Feds would arrest you in either case.
Its the same thing as if you were just writing plans for a conspiracy to kill someone and then you had someone else do the killing. You are still getting nailed for murder either way.
So I don't think words should be protected if they involve pornographic descriptions of sex with minors and especially if they are being sold on a commercial web site.
Obviously this site caters to pedos. Obviously there is more to the site than just stories since members were apparently able to trade image files and you can bet they aren't pictures of generally acceptable pornography.
I'd venture to guess many who say this cp stuff should be protected don't have their own children yet. If you did, you wouldn't be backing this sick shit up one bit. There IS a line out there. It may be murky at times. But as they've said in many cases, "You can't describe precisely with words, but you know it when you see it."
|