In case you do not know, Dakota Fanning who was 12 at the time, starred in a movie titled Houndog. In the movie she tries to act older than what she is with bad results.
She performs a strip-tease for some older guys and later on is graphically raped by one of them. She is not shown nude and obviously she wasn't really raped.
Certain groups are asking the US Attorney General to bring federal child pornography charges against the makers of the movie (actually anyone involved in the movie which could include the other actors, camera people, and so forth).
Do you feel that such charges are justified or is this movie protected under the First Amendment?
Here is the news article if you would like to read it before you answer. http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?arti...
Let's see who can give the most intelligent answer to this interesting situation.
2007-02-22 13:48:20 · 2 answers · asked by bartmcqueary 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Well thats just stupid. The producers didn't offer her the part. She wanted to do it. It was her own choice because she just wants that Oscar so bad. 12 years old is a teenager. She can make her own decision. Her mom tried to go against it. The directors were shocked and uncertain but apparently Dakota Fanning convinced them to use her. It was tastefully done. I honestly don't think that the producers should be prosecuted because some 12 year old girl offered herself as a victim of rape in a movie.
2007-02-22 21:53:38 · answer #1 · answered by callieRach 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no nudity or actual sex acts taking place so the charges are unwarranted.
2007-02-23 05:52:31 · answer #2 · answered by cheri b 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋