Brian Ribbon writes: "The British government has announced that it will soon be illegal to possess nude child art, which includes drawings, sculptures and computer generated images depicting nude children. While it is difficult to deny that some people will support this new law, should we really believe that this is about protecting children, or is it simply another example of popularist politics from a government official who desperately needs to improve his public image?"
Brian Ribbon writes: "The BBC has a report regarding a study into child welfare by international charity Unicef, which reveals that the US and UK have the lowest levels of child welfare out of 21 countries studied. The study measured child welfare using six categories; family and peer relationships, material well-being, health and safety, behaviour and risks, and children's own sense of well-being (educational and subjective).
Is it a coincidence that the countries which have the most draconian legislation disguised as measures to protect children also have the lowest level of child welfare, or is the level of paranoia and hysteria in these countries actually harming children?"
Brian Ribbon writes: "The Daily Mail is reporting that Police in the UK will be given unlimited access to the homes of convicted sex offenders. They claim that these powers will allow them to prevent future acts of child molestation, but are they correct in their assumption that most sex offenders — paedophiles or otherwise — are child molesters? Could the government simply be testing new powers against a group which is frequently used as a scapegoat?"