I repeat..I WOULD HAVE NAKED PICS OF MY KIDS ON THE WEB. ITS ONLY A PICTURE!
A pedophile would have a better shot of getting a kid by taking them on the way to school, store, or in the yard.
Yeah, but with their pictures posted on the Internet, you're practically giving the pedophiles the info about where they are and what they're doing and what they look like ......just in case the pedophile might find them attractive!
Wow, Orleander, I'm .....ahhhh, well, ....I'm flabbergasted at your lack of protection for your own children. Perhaps you should seek some help?
Baron Max
How about this Tiassa?Who wants to argue that the following picture is pornographic?
I think prudishness at this degree suggests people are in dire need of help.
Who wants to argue that the following picture is pornographic?
Sam is in NJ.
I think prudishness at this degree suggests people are in dire need of help.
Who wants to argue that the following picture is pornographic?
Your kids are too ugly to molest.
I'm comparing a photo to a photo. None of it is the real thing. Its a PHOTO!
So if a photo is just a photo, why is it wrong to put pornographic pictures of kids on the internet in your opinion ?
...Wow, Orleander, I'm .....ahhhh, well, ....I'm flabbergasted at your lack of protection for your own children. Perhaps you should seek some help?
Baron Max
because what is being done to those kids in those photos is WAY different than any photo most parents take of their kids.
Shorty 37 said:
Of course you would post that.....because it pretty far fetched from what we are talking about.
It isn't, but the OP said it was about "artistic" photographs.
Draqon said:
How about this Tiassa?
How is this picture?