Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: Insane3D
As much as I hate to defend the guy, a fully clothed teenage girl on a table is not considered "child porn".
it did not say he posted child porn, they said he posted a picture from a child porn site. if you look at the pic, it clearly has a url to this child porn site.
therefore it is a valid banning and the OP is an idiot.
No, it's not. There is no "child pornography" on that site. It's pictures of that girl, and none of the pictures have any nudity or sexual content. Bad taste yes, pornography no.
You do know the definition of child pornography don't you?