Re: On the Hill: Child Porn "Morphing"

[Intense <exalt@miworld.net>]

On Wed, 5 Jun 1996, Bruce M. wrote:

> On Tue, 4 Jun 1996, Black Unicorn wrote:
> 
> people in nude photographs consisted of a usually doctor administered 
> examination (of the picture) where the genitals and other age 
> characteristics of the BODY were taken into account.  I don't think a 
> person's face ever was, or ever should be, a factor.
> 
> > Silliness.  All silliness.
> 
> 	Very true.  Next there will be laws banning provocative pictures of
> adults dressed in child-like garb or acting out child-like sexual 
> fantasies (the infamous "spank me Daddy!).
> 

Urk anything that looks child-like, can be considered child porno.. 
again, it's a scarry thought that they govt. can prohibit someting that 
they deem to be "alike" in whatever way they feal....  :(


               *          <exalt@miworld.net>           *