[summerdown2]

The question is how anyone can draw up a law that leaves art on one side and porn on the other.

It's Lady Chatterley's Lover all over again, and to suggest there's no need to be concerned is, I think, you misrepresenting the position. Until this is defined, there's a lot to be concerned about.

[oneeyedpigeon]

OK, I didn't mean to say there's no need to be concerned. But my point is, by wildly exaggerating the purpose and effects of this law, you're actually derailing what should be a sensible discussion. Personally, I find myself sympathising with the law, in part because of the extreme hysteria in response to it. I also find myself sympathising with it because I want child abuse to be eradicated, but that would be getting back to the actual issue at hand.