>> |
Ande
>>466988 >>466983
The things that you're alluding to is Bush's CPPA which the supreme court has already struck down. Basically it makes any depictions of children in states of undress as chargable as real child pornography. Also, and I may be wrong on this, but it can actaully jail someone if the person looks to be under 18, but isn't (in drawings not in real life). This reason this ban on drawing got struck down was because this is a victimless crime, and also, it doesn't fail the Miller test to qualify as obscenity.
The Miller test has three parts to it:
1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient (sexual) interest
2. Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law,
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary and/or artistic, political, or scientific value.
In other words, from what I've heard, if the picture was drawn, then it apparently it has artistic value, and as a result, is protected. So in short, yes, lolicon is legal in the U.S. Canada however...
|