The justification of censorship of any kind is the presumption that a bad thing will happen if a person is exposed to it ... will rape, pillage, and/or plunder if exposed to images/words of one or all of the above. In libel/slander cases, there is no such presumption of harm ... it must be proved. And that any real harm had to be the result of the original libel/slander and not to anything else. I learned this lesson the hard way. This is even true in criminal matters regarding threats, an actual harm or specific attempt to cause harm to a specific perosn must be proved. Despite stalking laws, blowing off steam is not a crime. Even if it were established that there was a causal link between looking at bad things caused bad things, the only crime can be prosecuted is not the look, the the act. As it regards the heinous crime of sexual abuse of a child, nothing is served by hiding the extent of the crime in the arts or in journalism. It affects one third of us all, and twenty percent of us with some severity. Over 80% of felons in prison have been abused sexually as a child .... and the ravings of many of the world's mad men (Hitler, Stalin, Saddam, et al) can be tied directly to established patterns of child abuse. It's serious shit.

Gordon