JC
Visitor
|
Re:3 Years for spying on kids - 2008/08/28 09:14
Pete Clarke wrote:
What I took real offence to was the entirely spurious linking of kiddy porn with news images of injured kids being caught up in battles etc.
That is utter bollocks and anyone who thinks the two are somehow the same, and that one justifies the other, is either a paedophile or just plain bonkers.
Well Pete, I haven't read any comments here supporting the viewing of child porn. I see people asking serious questions about a serious subject. I think that if someone purposely targets a child and murders it and then someone takes a photo of that dead child and publishes it to the world, it is different to a child just being caught up in a battle and, unless the photo specifically acts as a memorial to a named child, they are just using the dead child for effect. It may not be sexual but it is abusive. In fact there are people who get kicks from images of dead and mutilated children. So I agree with Denise and RT Mason. there is a much bigger picture which certain people refuse to consider.
I haven't seen anyone using one type of image to justify another. I think you are reading what you want to read.
|
Messageboards 
