I am also going to take off after this post, but I will clarify my point for you. Assuming that "virtual child porn" means a visual depiction that is totally photorealistic but generated via 3D rendering or painting, and "real child porn" is a photograph of molestation: You are not okay with somebody making virtual child porn using real child porn as a reference. (CP A) You are not okay with somebody making virtual child porn using a real child as a reference, even if the real child has never been molested. (CP B) You are okay with somebody making virtual child porn without using a real child as a reference. (CP C) I wonder then, what if by chance in the future a person is born who grows up to a certain age, and they look identical to the person in CP C? What if they are then molested in the same manner as depicted in CP C, such that if a photograph of the molestation is made, it is to the human eye identical to CP C? Does this retroactively make it immoral for CP C to have been created and viewed by pedophiles? Because in the past you said it was not, but now it is visually identical to real child pornography of a real child being molested. My argument is that this shows that it has always been the production of real CP that you have an issue with and not the viewing of CP, your mind is just struggling to realize this.