posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 12:17 AM
Originally posted by Amuk
Originally posted by Vajrayana
Athough pedophilia was practiced in ancient Greece/Rome/Sparta...we have evolved into a more noble society where such debasing acts towards the
innocent should be dealt with swift & severely - for the scars & trauma left behind is unforgivable.
I think anyone that touches a child should be shot, but how is a drawing pedophilia? What child has been harmed?
Should a possessing a drawing of a murder be classified as murder?
I understand where you're coming from where the lines can be blurred.You brought up a drawing of a murder-I'll apply it in the school setting.I know
their have been recent cases involving a student's "art" depicting violence towards another student/teacher,even the president if i remember
correctly, which was then confiscated and used against them as if it showed possible intent or premeditation to commit the act.Some of these cases
have gained a new heightened level of sensitivity in the wake of Columbine,now 9/11 and with the fear of a domestic Beslan.I can not agree here with a
drawing of a murder being evidence of possible malice aforethought of the crime depicted,or any other harbinger of harm,certainly not the crime of
murder itself...for like you said no one was harmed,and any illustration can be subject to many interpretations,also the age,mood,psychological state
of the artist while drawing the work-just these unknown factors alone indicate reasonable doubt to me if ever used to establish evidence of any sort
of thought crime or
an indication of predispostion for violence in the creator of the work.If this was so, South Park could be a target of such scrutiny.Intentions of
humor/lampoon/shock value/entertainment factor could always be used as an explanation for any violent illustrations so I think no prosecution could
hold much weight establishing a crime from the artist's rendering without applying their own subjective bias,thus creating more reasonable doubt to a
third party(jurist).
Also the differentiating between nudity & pornography.For example, if an artist agrees to draw a precocious teenage model in the nude,then afterwards
discovers the model was underage,can/should they be prosecuted if age wasn't asked/given/established before the work proceeded,without knowing the
details,some would surely be quick to condemn the artist,if not for being a svengali/seductress,certainly for their lack of judgement.
Like I said earlier,I believe it to be a high crime when a child/child's image is depicted in a sexual manner,as it aims to exploit the innocent by
invoking illicit desires in the predatory.
[edit on 11-2-2005 by Vajrayana]
[edit on 11-2-2005 by Vajrayana]