SuN
.:~**~.~**~.~**~:.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23745385-5006009,00.html
"POLICE armed with a search warrant are raiding the Paddington art gallery on suspicion that some of the artworks depicting young children have broken the law.
It is believed police will seize any items - including those by photographer Bill Henson - which they believe break child pornography laws or indecency laws.
Naked photographs of children as young as 12 were today removed from the controversial exhibition as police moved to interview the young models and their parents."
The works were later returned to the artist.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/07/2296015.htm
"Artists are defending the controversial decision of Art Monthly magazine to run a photograph of a naked child on its front cover.
The girl's father, art critic Robert Nelson, says the family has no regrets about the photograph and he has rejected the Prime Minister's criticism of the work.
"There's never been any study that suggests that there's a link between paedophilia and art," he said.
"Unfortunately we're working without any science; people are just making these assertions about protecting children, which is unarguable - I mean why would you not want to [protect them]?"
Sooooooo, there's going to be some law changes due to current controversy over naked kids being photographed for artistic purposes.
So do u think these images are art or cp, and are the artists/parents exploiting their kids?
"POLICE armed with a search warrant are raiding the Paddington art gallery on suspicion that some of the artworks depicting young children have broken the law.
It is believed police will seize any items - including those by photographer Bill Henson - which they believe break child pornography laws or indecency laws.
Naked photographs of children as young as 12 were today removed from the controversial exhibition as police moved to interview the young models and their parents."
The works were later returned to the artist.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/07/2296015.htm
"Artists are defending the controversial decision of Art Monthly magazine to run a photograph of a naked child on its front cover.
The girl's father, art critic Robert Nelson, says the family has no regrets about the photograph and he has rejected the Prime Minister's criticism of the work.
"There's never been any study that suggests that there's a link between paedophilia and art," he said.
"Unfortunately we're working without any science; people are just making these assertions about protecting children, which is unarguable - I mean why would you not want to [protect them]?"
Sooooooo, there's going to be some law changes due to current controversy over naked kids being photographed for artistic purposes.
So do u think these images are art or cp, and are the artists/parents exploiting their kids?
