This message was self-deleted by its author

[Nine]

168. Look, this isn't complicated.

There are laws in place designed to prevent, for example, your neighbor from showing your young child a pornographic video. Such an act would not, of course, "endanger" the child in the very narrow and irrelevant interpretation you seem to be focusing on; it would not be the equivalent of dangling the child over a cliff. But the charge is not "endangering the physical safety of a minor," it's "endangering the welfare of a minor." Welfare can include psychological well-being. I'm not a lawyer and someone might nitpick about my legal definitions but the point is that there should be a law against your neighbor showing your young child a porno, and there is a law against it. Can there be gray areas in that law like there are gray areas in any law? Sure. I wouldn't want to see a well-intentioned high school art teacher thrown into jail for showing the students a classical nude sculpture. I wouldn't want a parent arrested for taking a 14-year-old to see an R-rated movie with some violence and make-out scenes. There are gray areas, but this case isn't one of them in my opinion.