Originally Posted by Ustwo

Sex with a sexually mature (note I said sexually) child is one thing. I don't approve of it but more from a protection aspect, 13-18 year olds tend to be dumbasses, 18+ slightly less dumbass.

Sex with a sexually immature child, no grass on the field, is fucked up.

The first is fluid. Not even every state in America agrees where the line is, so its all over the place world wide. There can be valid arguments on both sides. I think its the wealth and the 'extended' childhoods in the west which push that line to 18, where in some impoverished nation, 14 makes more sense.

The second is where I put the perverts.

So which group is being discussed here?

Originally Posted by Sharon

You can't compare CP with pictures of murdered victims. Those pictures don't encourage murders in the same way as CP encourages child abuse. A closer parallel might be comparing them with snuff films. If people were seeking out and paying for snuff films, that would probably end up leading to more murders in the same way CP would end up producing more child abuse.

To answer the question about whether it's wrong... sexual abuse of children fucks them up, in most cases for the rest of their lives. CP causes child abuse pretty much without exception, and therefore I think it is wrong.

Which I suppose brings us to the tangent of whether porn is wrong if it fucks up its participants (and in many cases it probably does). But we already have enough threads on that.