Should that pedophile that is on the news be charged with violating childrens rights to NOT be subject to known sites of lust? If a child is harmed because of his pictures, can't he be charged with instigating the crime?
More to the point, would it not be moral to have laws barring ANY photos of children in sites that are not commercial in nature?
I would think the child has a right to NOT have their image used on sites geared for the "pleasure" of viewing them.
What are your thoughts?
2007-07-31
04:25:05
·
4 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Other - Society & Culture
There is a difference of a crowd shot with a child being run in the news, or for a commercial, and a child being shown in a crowd on a site of just girls.
2007-07-31
05:06:40 ·
update #1