Pomp

The Other Michael,

You might also consider the case of the 13 year old in 3002 who finds an archived bit of child erotica in his/her local hyper-dimensional museum.

99Percent,

There is also the possibility that the pictures are completely fake. Is it still morally wrong to be aroused by a bunch of binary digits that happen to render pornography?

IMO, insofar as it might help to create a market for the further production of real child porn (or, I suppose, other exploitive activities), it might be considered immoral. Otherwise, I find it quite "icky," but I don't see any reason to coerce people into not doing it. Again, of course, this is a very tough call to make, and I'd prefer to err on the safe side.

I suppose another strong reason that we might consider such behavior immoral is that it is quite possible that a relaxation of the taboo on child porn, while not directly harming children, might contribute to a relaxation of the taboo on sex with actual children which, as far as I can see, would harm children (in most cases, anyway...I guess it's possible that there are some 13 year olds out there who are mature enough, or whatever, to handle sexual relationships, even with adults, but, even if they do exist, they're an extreme minority and any general ethical principle ought to deal with what is best for most children, I would think). Yet another reason that I prefer to err on the side of safety when child porn is involved.

And, hell, I feel halfway icky even proposing that there might be some child out there in the world who might not be harmed by such a relationship...yuck.

Bubba

At what point does child porn become child porn? To some, a 13 year old posing in a bikini on the beach is immoral and exploitive.

Other people would allow for "artistic" nude photographs of children. And yet others would say that it is not pornography unless actual sex is involved.

How do you all define it?

Bubba

Mark_Chid

Numbering your points without including references or evidence doesn't make them more convincing.

Anyway, even if NAMBLA did call themselves a secular humanist organisation, so what? David Koresh called himself a Christian, as did Hitler!

Bubba

...And NAMBLA is bad...Why? At what point does a 13 year old boy have the right to consent to sex with and older man? When he's 15? 17? 18?? Never???

Bubba

Amen-Moses

How about some form of licence, like a driving licence, you could have a test designed to measure someones understanding of sexual matters and then if they pass they can have a licence.

That way only unlicenced sex becomes criminal.

Personally I disagree with arbitrary "objective" measures such as age limits because they are different all around the world.

Take me as an example, when I was 30 I had a relationship with a 17 year old woman, in my country there is absolutely legally nothing wrong with that and in fact she was far more sexually experienced than I. When an American friend of mine found out about it they called me a paedophile! My late Grandmother married a man 25 years older than herself and was quite happy, but of course she was 63 at the time so nobody batted an eyelid.

Now to further use the example of driving, Jason Button was in the daft position that on leaving school at 16 and having been racing motor vehicles since he was about 7 he couldn't legally drive on the roads (the age is 17 here). Not only that but when he did reach 17 he would be rated by insurance companies as an equal risk with all other 17 year olds even though by that age he was driving in formula one 800 BHP cars for a living!

Amen-Moses

Amen-Moses

I did a sex survey on a forum a few years ago and the majority of responders had their first sexual experiences well before the legal limit and in the majority of cases the person they had it with was much older than them. This was the same regardess of gender and sexual preference so why do we seem to squirm more when discussing homosexuality than heterosexuality? Is it purely fear of wht we don't understand?

The other interesting point from surveys is that the average age at which people have sex for the first time is virtually the same all over the world regardless of what the legal limit in force is, i.e the average for the US is the same as for Britain even though the legal limit is 2 years different.

Amen-Moses

GunnerJ

I know that. My point was, if you (not you personally) say that it's immoral for kids to make kiddie porn because they're exploiting other kids, shouldn't you say it's illegal for two minors to have sex, because they're exploiting each other, and neither are capable of giving consent?

I agree with you about the arbitrary nature of age of consent laws.

raistlinjones

Hmm..we could. To be honest, if we're really saying that children (those people who have not yet reached the age of consent) are not really able to make decisions (like having sex, whether or not to go to school, various money matters) because they are not yet mature enough to realise the consequences, maybe they are free from moral responsibility. This would be consistent with laws that have kids sentenced differently from adults.

So, do we want to ultimately say that 13 year olds (and other children) are free from moral judgement? I think that's reasonable. It's even more reasonable when applied to 6 year olds; it is really evil for her to cut someone with the scissors? No, because she doesn't really understand.

tronvillain

Nambla:
Well, the age for anal sex here is eighteen, while the age for other forms of sexual activity is fourteen (with various exceptions), which essentially makes the age of consent for male-male relationships eighteen. I expect that the difference will eventually be eliminated.

echidna

You need Christian theology to tell you not to abuse an 8 year old ?????

And atheists are the immoral ones ?????

The same way I don't tar all Christians with the same brush, I don't expect the same in return.