Comments on: Person peddling Jamie Lynn Spears breastfeeding pics is in deep trouble

By: Hildred Hassel

Hildred Hassel — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 01:24:58 +0000

dont ya just love that teen pussy in your mouth

By: Scott

Scott — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 01:06:40 +0000

Here is the federal child porn law. Naked breasts of any age are not child porn. We have to distinguish legal definitions from personal beliefs.

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2256.html

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Jeanne

Jeanne — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 05:25:48 +0000

Anonymous Realist needs to seriously check the arrogant attitude and chill. You are thinking way too critcally here and putting other people down in the process. Maybe you’re right and you’re just way too smart for the rest of us. I beg to differ with you re: age of consent/pornography laws. Two different things. Pornography involves children in a state of undress or engaged in erotic poses or sexual activity. While it usually involves pre-pubescent children it can also include post-pubescents and also include minors (under 18 yrs.)according to the jurisdiction of the state. Why do you think most of the legit porn sites say you must be 18 or over to enter? And anytime teens are featured their age is always 18 or older? You also have to be 18 years or over to do porn movies. Now who is showing their ignorance?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Carly

Carly — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:53:05 +0000

Thats so harsh on jamie lynn,

vdantev, your comments dont make no sence and just insult people, chatting about someones mole and mcdonalds:S everyone has a opinion so dont insult people when the voice theres. but basically u chat a load of shit. next time keep your mouth shut unless its something usefull

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: abc

abc — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:37:28 +0000

U saw Thora Birch (American Beauty) and Keira Knightley (The Hole) nude when they were 15 or 16 – was that child porn too?

sry for the bad english, no native speaker.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: WOW people...

WOW people... — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:39:49 +0000

Thank you to whoever posted the last comment with the name “Stupid”.

I can’t believe I had to read an entire page of comments to find ONE person that understood why this is illegal. She is a minor, and it says it right in the article… the pic doesn’t have to be sexual in nature, showing the breast of someone under 18 is still illegal.

All you people who can’t figure that out are the same ones who are going to vote for Obama because he is going to better your worthless little lives…

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Stupid

Stupid — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 14:39:06 +0000

It’s not because the of the baby, it’s because Jamie Lynn is a minor. She’s under 18 and they’re trying to sell her naked pictures. That’s child porn. It’s like when Girls Gone Wild allowed people under 18 to be on the show.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: righton

righton — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 04:32:09 +0000

If she’s old enough to have sex and get pregnant then she relinquishes her “minor” status, much like someone who commits murder at 17. If you do adult things, you are subject to be treated in an adult way. If any other celeb had a pic snapped in the same fashion, the tabloids would be knocking each other down trying to get it.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Hell0

Hell0 — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 04:29:32 +0000

Poor dumb girl. JL has that same lost, distant, psychotic look in her eyes just like Shitney! Runs in the family, eh!!!

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: WTF?!?!

WTF?!?! — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 03:19:34 +0000

Since none of us has seen the pictures, the assumption that just because she’s nursing the child does her breast (and nipple, which is the hallmark of “porn”) is shown is way premature.

It is the intimate act of breastfeeding and that intrusion into her privacy that’s the issue.

Oh, and asterisk kiss asterisk kiss to you, too.

Report this comment as spam or abuse