Besides all those Victorian-style fairies (which practially litter the stationery stores), there are a whopping number of "Madonna and Child" images showing a naked boy on church walls and Christmas stamps (let's see Ashcroft and his ilk censoring the Post Office for mailing pornography on the OUTSIDE of the envelope!). Some of the Madonna images even show the kid nursing at a naked breast. Yikes! (Cover my eyes from such indecency.) Come February there are scads of Cupids fluttering around with everything (such as it is) hanging down as they search for victims to shoot (sex and violence, what a marketing link-up). All sarcasm aside, I realize that the owners of this Forum want to avoid being on either end of a lawsuit (I won't say "the wrong end", because defending artistic freedom is never wrong), however I would hope that common sense would prevail. Rockwellian kids at a fishing hole may be trite, but it is hardly obscene. Anybody getting prurient thoughts while thumbing a Christmas card has more problems than we can manage here. If we are going to go around smashing statues and flowerpots because they show happy little cherubs and draping copies of David (who was pre-teen IIRC) and shuttering church windows and closing museums, then I suppose the logical next step would be to tear down any image of a nude child, even if it is totally virtual. The nudity of children is often used in art to symbolize innocence, and it has held this role for centuries. If we take away that which is so emblematic of innocence, what do we have left? Carolly