i've also heard about this story, and i think it's a little bit strange that a sort of simpsons should be erotic! I just think that they are comical, and have nothing to do with pornography! I just think it's just illegal if a real picture of child is seen

The judge has obviously not heard of Rule #34 or spent much time on the internet.

God help you if you even think about drawing dirty pictures (or build apartments higher than 5 stories in school zones)!

Gibo,

You miss the point. What you say about porn I won't argue with. The question here is, is this material porn? I have seen this material long before I even heard of the internet. It is not intended to be erotic. It is intended to be comical. In your case, it may be morally wrong, but to make this stuff illegal and classify it as child porn is totally ridiculous. You are the only poster on this thread who doesn't feel the court's deciscion is stupid.

By all means fight child pornography to protect children, but please, if society is to take child protection seriously we must not turn this into a witch hunt.

Yes Steel Mann it is material porn.
It is, if it stirs up the same feelings inside people as material porn...and it will.

Gibo,

Perhaps this material stirs up those feeling within you but it doesn't with most people, and definately not with me.

Porn is intended to sexually arouse. Even full frontal nudity of real people (ie nudsit magazines) is deemed to be non-pornographic.

Read my other post on "Man Charged With Posting Video" for further comment.

Gibo,

I've exceeded my daily limit on the other thread, but I suggest we stop mud slinging now and agree to disagree now otherwise you're going to find yourself getting put on the banned list again. I don't want that to happen and most people on this forum enjoy your posts even if we disagree.
No, I'm not with the athiest foundation and I don't personally know any gay christians, neither am I a gay myself, (although I do have gay neighbours and they are very nice people).
I don't agree with a lot of traditional Christian thinking, but a lot has changed over time.
Do you know Gibo, that at one time the many churches would not admit anyone that had been divorced as a member? Even the innocent party.
Women were traditionally banned from speaking in church. Many Christian groups banned interacial marraige and in the 1800's condoned slavery. All done in the name of God and used the Bible to justify it. All these things have changed thankfully. I live by the two commandments Jesus gave us, to love God, and to love your neighbour as yourself. My greatest enemies (just like Jesus had) are the religious people.