Should Child Pornography be viewable

Hmm it seems this debate was about something else than I thought it was. No matter I shall debate the resolution and my opponents what my opponent intended this debate to be bout. First lets further attack this resolution.Viewable- fit to be watched: of a good enough standard, or in a good enough condition, to be watched.Good-morally excellent; virtuous; righteous; pious."C1: Morally, I don't accept watching Child Pornography purposefully.""I, too, agree that Child Pornography is wrong,"My opponent is saying that child pornography isnt acceptable to be watched, on purpose. To be watching something is to view it for a good amount of time. So he is saying that child porn isnt fit to be watched nor is it morally excellent witch contradicts the meanings of the words of this resolution. So as we see here my opponent is defeating his own resolution. He is arguing that child porn is wrong to be viewed while he is affirming the resolution. This is an example of a contradiction my friends. By affirming this resolution it is my opponents job to defend child pornography viewing in not just one, but all situations involving the resolution. He has already proven an aspect of the resolution supports a con argument. By saying child porn is wrong he is contradicting his position of this debate by proving that child porn isnt morally acceptable to be viewed. "But second, there is no way for the federal government to differentiate between Intention and Accidental viewings," Not true. This is how the top court of New York commented on the matter on May 8 2012. "Viewing child pornography on the Internet without taking further action such as printing or saving files does not necessarily constitute possession, New York's top court ruled on Tuesday.""When a Web page is viewed, a copy of the page is stored in a computer's "cache," which allows that page to load more quickly on future visits.""To "possess" cached images, "the defendant's conduct must exceed mere viewing to encompass more affirmative acts of control such as printing, downloading or saving," Judge Carmen Ciparick wrote for the court."http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com...As we can see the government isnt going to prosecute you if you accidentally have pop-up porn. Convictions are made based on evidence of the accused intentions and activities involving the pictures. So this claim is defeated. "C2: Not all things that are legal are morally acceptable or righteous, and vice-versa""Under Federal law, the importation of people for the purposes of prostitution is illegal and considered a form of human trafficking prohibited by federal code and the 13th Amendment of US Constitution.".....http://sex-crimes.laws.com...Please remember that I said, "As we know if something is illegal and prohibited by federal law there is a extremely high chance that the action that is illegal is not morally good, or righteous."my opponent said this...."and I would say that most people think prostitution is morally incorrect. But it is still law." My opponent made this bold claim without any evidence to back it up. So lets see what majority of the people think.Should the city stop enforcing laws against prostitution? Support: 36.49% Oppose: 63.51%.................California Yes: 36.33% No: 62.78%.............Nevada http://prostitution.procon.org... In the link there are any more polls regarding this issue. As we can see the people support this law and think that it is morally justified. This contention would work if it was limited to local or state laws. Were talking about federal laws here. Unless my opponent can present a federal law that majority of the people think should be lifted this point fails. he also says that law are made on accident. This is false. How can three branches of government of hundreds of people mistakenly pass a law? "C3: I believe people who make child pornography should still be arrested." "Making or Producing Child Pornography should still be illegal, as These acts are all done intentionally. Unlike watching Child Pornography, making/producing it can't be done accidentally. They do it intentionally, and should be punished as a felony. Child Pornography can undermine society, and the people making it should be held responsible." Once again voters my opponent is defeating his position. Being pro he must defend that we child pornography should be acceptable to be viewed under any circumstances. This last contention supports my stance being con that viewing child porn isnt morally acceptable. This this point fails as well. ....................................................... Conclusion 1. Child pornography is illegal therefore it is not morally justified. this point still stand since my opponent could not effectively counter this contention and has failed to provide evidence for his claims. 2.The issue of pop-ups This point still stands because I have proven that convictions will not be made on simple pop ups alone that one does not show interest in. Dropped arguments by pro C1: Morally, I don't accept watching Child Pornography purposefully. This statement contradicts my opponents entire case and supports mine. C2: Not all things that are legal are morally acceptable or righteous, and vice-versa This claim fails to hold based on the evidence that i provided in the rebuttal and based on the absence evidence of pro. C3: I believe people who make child pornography should still be arrested. Once again my opponent contradicts his position and has pointed out atleast one incident where viewing child porn isnt acceptable witch defeats his case.