frc home > culturefacts

In the October 29, 2007 editorial "Checking Child Pornography," the Washington Post addresses a case before the U.S. Supreme Court, in which a man accused of peddling child pornography is seeking to have a charge of "pandering" dismissed as "unconstitutional." The Post is to be commended for arriving at this conclusion despite "concerns that the pandering law could be used to ensnare serious artists and academics who deal with difficult or controversial subject matter." On what basis did the Post decide that the child pornography law trumped "artistic freedom"? The editorial states: "Most compelling is the government's profound interest in protecting children." This sentiment is laudable and correct. However, would that the Post applied the same reasoning across the board where the safety and well-being of children are involved, such as the issue of homosexual adoption. For research showing the problems that children in homosexual households are exposed to, see the Insight paper "Homosexual Adoption: Placing Children at Risk."

frc home > culturefacts