We already remove images of children which are considered to be illegal under US law, and I see no one arguing that we do otherwise. The recent kerfuffle has been over the broader category of sexual images. But if we are take account of all religious and moral sensitivities, where will it end? There are many countries in the world in which the depiction of the prophet Muhammad is a crime, or religious systems see it as something abominable. We must respect these laws and these beliefs, whether we like them or not? Pete / the wub

Mikemoral wrote: Who said that the images Jimmy deleted (and which started all this debate) were illegal in the US? If they were, we would all agree that kind of images should be deleted. The problem are borderline, legal images, with a bit of enciclopedical value, and that nevertheless many people find objectionable.

*Please, read good. Common Sense. Do you think it´s of common sense delete this?...* Common sense is not Common<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sense#Use_common_sense>se>. In the Islamic world depictions of Muhammad are considered to be highly offensive, akin to western views on child pornography. I am not offended in the least by images of muhammed, but other people are. By your rationale we would have to remove every image or content that might be considered offensive due to it being a matter of respect. It would mean that every pornographic diagram, drawing or image would have to be removed. We would have to remove the Muhammad category. We would have to clean our medical pages which contain photo's of certain diseases that can be considered gross. We would have to remove logo's from pages on secret societies as these societies often consider those logo's "Secret". In fact, there is little to no content that is not considered offensive by at least part of the population. Therefor we include relevant images as long as they are not against the law. Images with a high level of "Offensiveness" to a large group of people should be handled with care, but not evaded. One persons "common sense removal" is another persons censorship. I strongly believe in the right to choose - we should not enforce people to look at content they do not wish to see. But equally we should not remove content merely on the basis that someone doesn't like it. ~Excirial On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:54 PM, marcos &lt;tal_tor9(a)yahoo.es&gt; wrote: