The most common argument against your point - child pornography is illegal because real child are harmed while making it. Most Western nations allow drawings of child porn but disallow photographs for this reason.
I think all drawing that depict adults having sex with children or children engaged in age inappropriate sex acts should be banned from Wikipedia. My reasoning is that it depicts and condones the sexual exploitation of children. These drawing shock the consciousness of people that are otherwise strong free speech advocates. Sydney
Ryan Delaney wrote:
On 4/7/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Some of us feel that even if the image had been free, it still should never have been included in Wikipedia. Concentrating on its copyright status is ignoring the real debate, rather than deciding once and for all how to deal with images that would be perceived by the public to be child porn.
It's not even that the public would perceive that image to be child porn. It is child porn. It's an image of a child created for the sole purpose of producing pleasurable sexual excitation in the viewer. Child + porn = child porn. Process isn't relevant when it comes to stuff like this. Whether we should host child porn on WMF servers is not something that is up for a vote.
Ryan