From: taz@momad.UUCP (Sysop)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,news.admin,news.admin.policy,alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.d
Subject: Re: Does USENET condone CHILD PORNOGRAPHY?
Keywords: Pedophelia Child Pornography Porn Immoral Illegal
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 19:11:19 -0500
Reply-To: taz%momad@infoserv.com
Organization: MoDeM MaDnEsS BBS   1-516/295-9435

In <ed.721116002@cwis> ed@cwis.unomaha.edu (Ed Stastny) writes:

>nude child "child pornography".  Not all nudity is pornography.  I don't
>know the LEGAL definitions of child pornography, but I know that if it
> 
     If you don't know, then it is best not to speak.  Remember the saying,
          "It's better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to
           open your mouth and prove it to everyone."

>My definition of child pornography would be that of forcing a child to
>commit sexual acts and commiting that to film.  This violates the rights

	There's a lot more to it than that.

>of the child in any case.  I personally don't think it's a moral thing
>to do...and I think that it screws up children for life when they are
>molested.  A few of my friends were molested as children.  If a parent
>takes a picture of a their child nude...are they a pornographer?

	It depends on whether that picture stays in their photo album,
        or is distributed over a world-wide network for freaks to get
        off on. 


>Pornography, as someone previously defined it, is "erotica"...sexual.
>Nudity is not necessarily sexual...and even when it's interpretted as
>such...it's in the mind of the beholder.  Someone might see a nude

	Yes, erotica is sexual.  And where were these pictures posted?  
     In Alt.Binaries.Pictures.EROTICA.  A forum of EROTIC pictures.
                              ^^^^^^^  

>little girl and be sexually excited.  That's their prerogative, and as
>long as they don't violate anyone's rights, they should be left alone.
>You don't have to like them, and I probably wouldn't either, but I don't
>think they're violating any laws.  Someone might see a nude girl and see
>purity and innocence...and admire it as a work of art.  

	Again, you talk about violating laws, and I will quote your 
        message again,

  >> I don't know the LEGAL definitions of child pornography

      That is correct, because it is a FEDERAL OFFENSE to distribute child 
      pornography over state lines.  This includes distribution by COMPUTERS
      over state lines.

>Some would call you sick for even being subscribed to this newsgroup, I
>don't think you are.  I don't think people who are curious as to what
>all the hullabaloo is about the "infamous" GIFS of RUKO and KAPSTERS
>(etc) and download them to see are "criminals".  Information should be
>free....if anyone violated the rights of these girls or boys in the
>GIFS, they should be brought to justice.....but I don't see the use in
>playing dictator and telling people what they can or cannot see. 
>
>Why don't they arrest people at nude beaches for looking at nude
>children?

	Because that is not pornography.


>How many "pedophiles" do you really think are on this newsgroup?  How
>many of the people do you think downloaded RUKO and KAPSTERS just
>because there was controversey over them?  I think it's an overwhelming
>majority of the latter.  I viewed the files, I deleted them.  They were

	But how many people, after reading all about the fact that they were
	pornographic pictures of children asked TO POST MORE, and asked for
	people to trade child pornography pictures in e-mail?  That is a little
	bit more than simple 'curiousity.'


>never in "my possession".  They were a curiosity...but nothing great.  I
>suggest LIFE magazine or such "morally correct" photo mags for better
>depictions of the human form, young and old.
>Don't get me wrong, I don't think RUKO and KAPSTERS (and their ilk) are
>intelligent choices for posting here.  You're absolutely right that
>there could be a crack down and it would get a lot of innocent people in
>trouble.  I think they should be removed and that we should all
>investigate our local laws on the subject of "child pornography".  If we
>disagree with those laws, let a person with the appropriate authority
>know.  You know my views on the subject, if I'm to be arrested for
>them...then at least I'll know I stated what I thought was right and
>fair. 
> 

	Why would you be arrested for your views?  If you ran a system where
	these files were available to any user who subscribed to the news.group
	you would get in trouble for distributing them through YOUR SYSTEM!


>I don't think the solution is a witch-hunt, but a careful discussion of
>the issues involved.  I don't think we need to resort to turning
>each-other in to get this thing worked out.  Let me just suggest that
>anyone distributing what might be deemed "child pornography" to keep it
>private or regional until we can assure the NET isn't threatened by it.
>Listen to what SYSOP said (despite some of his generalisations and
>insults)...it's a reasonable viewpoint.  
> 
>Sysop: (a legit question) Isn't there a way you can just disallow
>certain postings or newsgroups on your board?

>(End of quoting)

	I don't have the time to sort through every single message that 
comes in here.  That board is up mostly for the users of this system.

What I want is a discussion of this issue, and get it resolved quickly, before
the news media hears about this, because you better believe that this will
be quite a sticky issue, and will endanger the a.b.p.e. newsgroup.  The 
internet is a large forum, with branches stretching out to educational,
governmental, military, public, and private organizations.   The news
would have a field day with this.  Look how much heat it's stirred up here?
Let's get it resolved and QUICK!  If the group would need to be moderated, 
then so be it.  If it has to go, then it has to go, but lets do SOMETHING
about it.
 

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------    
    Modem Madness       __________________        500 MEGz of GIFs
         BBS          _/ ||                ~-_      Adult Access
    516-295-9435    ,/   //       /~-       /  ~-_  ________---------------//
  -----------------------------------\-------------------____________  __//
 O--------------                  ~~^ |                                 | ~|
 }======{--------\____________________|______________________________   |  |
 \===== / /~~~\ \ \                   |         ________________________|-~
  \----|  \___/ ||--------------------'----------|  \____/ //
        `______''    Taz%Momad@Infoserv.Com       `_______'
Xref: sparky news.sysadmin:1416 news.admin:8471 news.admin.policy:283