From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 05:20:06 GMT
Keywords: Pedophelia Child Pornography Porn Immoral Illegal

Whatever happened to the 70-column standard in posts?

taz@momad.UUCP (Sysop) whines:

|	There are many groups in the alt.sex heirarchy that cater to many 
|different lifestyles, and I have absolutely nothing against any of them.  
|That is something that can be viewed by those interested, and ignored by 
|those who are not.   What makes me ashamed to be a part of the usenet is 
|that over the last couple of weeks, there have been numerous posts of
|CHILD PORNOGRAPHY in the Alt.Binaries.Pictures.Erotica group.  What kind 
|of people are we? It's not only immoral, but ILLEGAL to distribute child 
|pornography.  It's called Pedophelia!

1.  It is not necessarily illegal to distribute "child pornography."  It
is illegal to do so in the U.S., and probably in Canada, but there are
other countries connected to USENET.  Do they have to abide by our laws?
If that's the case, the US section of USENET needs to abide by the laws
of the other countries on the net...places where the right of free
expression is not recognized.  Entire subheirarchies of newsgroups would
have to vanish.

2.  Pictures of nude or partially nude children does not necessarily
constitute "child pornography" (US legal definition notwithstanding).
A picture of a nude is not necessarily erotic -- it is frequently art.
I personally do not get turned on by the image of a naked person.  Such
pictures are nice to look at, if only because the human figure is
beautiful.  There is nothing inherently "dirty" about the human form,
regardless of the model's age.  So long as everyone involved consents,
there should be no problem.

|It's a sick, sick thing.  And what's worse is that in the alt.binaries.
|pictures.erotica.D group, there are hordes of people ASKING FOR MORE!!!
|My postings and the postings of others who are offended by this don't 
|seem to do anything, so I am posting this message in the news.admin and 
|news.sysadmin, hoping to call some attention to this problem.  I do not want
|to see alt.binaries.pictures.erotica disappear, I happen to enjoy using 
|this news.group, but I also do not want to get arrested for distributing 
|child pornography.  Yes, I said arrested for DISTRIBUTING, because if 
|someone calls my system and downloads one of these sick pictures, then 
|it is I who will get in trouble with the law, because it was being 
|distributed from MY BOARD!   

If you are concerned about the legal ramifications of carrying the abpe
groups, then perhaps you should consider dropping that service.  It is
one of the reasons that those groups are not carried at some sites.

While your fears about legal action are understandable, there is some
question whether or not the legal system can make a case against you
because of the contents of one of the newsgroups you carry.  This is
one of the current issues being considered about electronic media in
government, computer privacy, and legal circles.

|Something must be done, and it must be done fast, or we will risk getting 
|a LOT of people in unnecessary trouble.  Imagine the circus the media will 
|have when a UNIVERSITY gets in trouble for distributing child pornography?

The media in the US and Canada has had a field day from time to time
regarding just what comes over USENET.  The net lives on.  If you try
and do away with one type of article from one group, they'll just start
showing up in another.  At least people know where the "dirty pictures"
are right now -- they're confined to a few groups created for those
purposes.  News admins at different sites can choose to not make those
groups accessible to their users.

|	I expect to get flamed for posting this message.   Who is going to 
|flame me?  The pedopheliacs will flame me.  The sick, perverted, immoral 
|people who have absolutely no scruples, and would probably take naked 
|pictures of their own mother to get off on. To these people, I say:  Go 
|ahead an flame, it just proves how sick you really are.  And besides, 
|it will make a NIFTY MAILING LIST to send to the proper authorities.  So 
|if you do flame me for this message, I suggest you hide your sick demented 
|collection of child pornography before you have the police knocking at 
|your door with a search warrant.

I read this paragraph, and seriously considered flaming you for it.  But,
I just don't think you're worth it, idjit.

|I'm sorry it has to be this way.  I, myself, am a frequent poster to a.b.p.e.
|but I would NEVER post anything so sick and demented as child pornography!  
|I hope something is done about this, and FAST!!

You realize, of course, that "sick and demented" is a relative term.  I'm
sure that there are people in news.* who would consider your admitting that
you post to abpe as an admission of your own sickness and dementedness.

Unless you are The Almighty, I don't think you (or anyone else) can provide
the definitive ruling on just what's sick and demented, and what isn't.
Only She can do that.

|I have spoken.

--
Michael Adams (StarOwl@uiuc.edu  madams@nyx.cs.du.edu  wi.4962@n7kbt.rain.com)

Walk softly and carry a BIG kitten. -- anonymous
Nancy Lord in '96