As I have said...they are not pornographic and nor do I believe they were intended to be, it doesn't matter to me what other people on the thread say just because they also disagree with the taking and showing of the photos doesn't mean we have to agree on the reason. I didn't say that no one on the thread said they thought they were pornographic did I? That is the problem with most discussions on HC, they are one dimensional. You either agree or disagree with everything I am saying rather than specific points of the arguement.
As for the rest of your posts it is merely once again justification that because it happenes it is alright.
My personal belief is that pedophilia is as rife in society as homosexuality. The genes or whatever that make them what they are as far as sexual desire is not a concious decision. However their actions are and any adult should know that preying on the innocent regardless of their own genetic makeup is not an acceptable action. Any form of 'art' that in any way promotes or condones such activity is repulsive in its ideals and illegal in its actions. Does the potrayal of nude children in pre pubescent fit?
I believe it does and can find no justification in your posts or any of the other posts that claim it to be innocent 'art'
