|
In this case I’m considering a naked picture and for arguments sake let’s suppose that regardless of whatever method the picture was taken the child was not traumatized or deeply affected. This topic is somewhat interesting. I think it’s safe to say that child pornography is wrong, but the interesting part is why. It’s almost wrongness by association; there is nothing wrong with the human body. However, there is agreement in the supposition that you can look at the human body in an evil or perverse way. The crux of the matter stands in practicality. It certainly is possible to look at child pornography and not be a pedophile, but there is no one that has the capacity to differentiate a pedophile and a non-pedophile who both watch child porn. So here it is reason that binds us. Child pornography is wrong because to allow otherwise is to have to allow for enough doubt that makes it logically inconsistent to jail someone for looking at child pornography. (hehe, reread this and summed it up to myself this way: It’s wrong because if it wasn’t wrong we couldn’t put people in jail for it. Kind of circular...but it made sense to me at the time.)
A slight tangent: I remember hearing once that giving people access to pornography of rape (anime) lead to less rape. The case considered was Japan. The counterargument given was that the society in Japan forces women to keep rape a secret, i.e. it’s not that this type of porn was somehow keeping crimes of rape low in Japan but rather they just went unreported. I don’t know enough about Japan to say either way, but what if it was true that child pornography (cartoon or what have you) lead to some pedophiles not acting on their urges? Would it be wrong to in that case? Sorry, if this was brought up before. I’m slightly sleepy and didn’t read through every post.
|