Doesn't it? Look at blueeagles blanket statements. blueeagle wants all of these sites shut down because of what some people might be thinking when viewing them. It's overreacting to a problem that can be minimized in other ways.This has nothing to do with thought police.
It is protecting children.
Protecting them to what end? I agree that they should be protected, but by the arguments I see here, it seems that some people would like to prosecute anyone who dared put any photo of any child on the net. That's sad really, and a bit frightening for our legal system. I'll also direct you to my earlier comments on the need for a better definition of the child porn laws. As it is now, the line in the sand on this issue is more a wave in a general direction than something definitive that can be pointed at and tell people not to cross.