Lookoo: The problem with that is, virtual child porn is not Nicorette for the pedophile... it isn't going to wean him off the real thing. And the problem with sex offenders is that images are only going to increase their desire for real experiences, not decrease. However, we are debating artist's freedom here, not the virtue of virtual child pornography. I will defend your right to create whatever virtual image you like that doesn't involve the use of living models. That doesn't mean I like the images, or would allow them in my house. Legume shows a good example. These cherubs have physical contact, there is a kiss involved, and genitals are showing. This type of thing would probably get an artist arrested, when interpreted by a zealous prosecutor under the new proposed law. At the very least, the person would be brought up on charges. Even if the case was dismissed, the damage is done to the artist's reputation. Victor Salva, who directed "Powder" and "Jeepers, Creepers" is a convicted pedophile. This transgression has followed him for years, (as it should, in my opinion) but imagine if someone were merely accused of peddling or creating pedophile images? Salva had protestors gathered at the opening of "Jeepers" in an attempt to keep people from supporting a pedophile, even though the subject matter of that film involved no children whatsoever. The stigma of such a thing could follow an artist for the rest of their lives. Do we really want a government attaching such a stigma to the art we create here at R'osity simply because we use the human form? Tilandra