They argued that looking at child porn should be illegal because it depicts people who are abused without consent. They don't think other depictions of people being abused without consent should be illegal to look at (ie: holocaust pictures). Now you say the reason child porn should be illegal to look at is because it depicts *children* being abused without their consent. Child porn is pictures of children being abused without their consent. So you have changed your argument to: "Looking at child porn should be illegal because it's child porn." That is a really skillful argument.... Are you going to quit drugs as soon as you hear: "Illegal drugs should be illegal because they are illegal drugs" ? lol