"I suppose if this was a cartoon he would have also been charged. I'm taking all my Flintstones DVD's to the Police station and giving myself up."

Steel Man good point, given the logic in the Simpsons porn case the portrayal of the physical assault of a cartoon child could potentially qualify. The mind boggles.

Almost every episode of the Simpsons shows Homer throttling Bart. If we take the logic "But by accepting that a person may be real or imaginary, and may be depicted by drawing then "a cartoon character might well constitute the depiction of such a person". McEwan was therefore guilty." http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/08/simpsons_supreme_court/ and combine it with this case it virtually wipes out almost all cartoon's. The child porn one also re-raises the question of old art works featuring depictions of naked children - if a cartoon of the Simpsons can be child porn then so to every piece of art showing naked children real or otherwise.

As has been said before - The Law is an Ass.

R0bert

No cartwheels or handstands, no swinging kids around, no cuddling them, no photos, no internet and no cartoons. Could we be given a list of what we are allowed to do with our kids? It would be shorter.

chainsmoker asks:

"Could we be given a list of what we are allowed to do with our kids? It would be shorter."

Here's such a list from personal experience:

1. Commit them to institutions isolated from accountability requirements.
2. Rape them.
3. Lock them up in solitary confinement.
4. Starve them, particularly of any human affection.
5. Send them to church every Sunday so they can learn to love the god who has deserted them.
6. Thrash them and rub their noses in it when they wet the bed.
7. Use them as human guinea pigs in medical experiments.
8. Lie to them if they ask whether they've got siblings.
9. Make them believe it's all their own fault.

If you don't believe me see the evidence at:
http://www.aph.gov.au/SENATE/COMMITTEE/clac_ctte/completed_inquiries/2004-07/inst_care/report/index.htm

I can't understand any of this.

The only question that keeps going
around in my mind is - WHY?

Why did this happen?
What evidence do they have against
this man?
Why single him out - surely others
are posting all sorts of material.
Why pick on this guy?

Do the Queensland Law Enforcement Authorities
have too much time on their hands?

It doesn't make any sense.

Im glad to see that there are men and women of wisdom in this country.

If we dont control the filth...much of which is related to children and their abuse...then society will definitely fall.

Law and Order has to start somewhere... to begin to save society from that fall.

The teaching at school that you have the right to choose to do exactly what you want to do under 'freedom rights', is drastically immoral.

Before any excercise of free will we have the giant obligation to consider its damage to moral society.
Im glad someone made a start. QLD isnt so bad me thinks.

You're on your own on this thread Gibo.

I noted somewhere else that you support parents smacking children and the cane in schools. You have to decide where you stand.

The reason I'm opposed to parents smacking children is that it is usually done in anger, and teaches the child that it's allright to repond to situations we don't like with violence. That is child abuse.