Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Residents of Dallas, Texas, are about to be graced with yet another disaster-piece created by Daniel Edwards, the artist who saw fit to sculpt a nude Britney Spears giving birth on a bearskin rug.
This time, he's created a nude Justin Bieber statue, placing the teen heartthrob next to his also very-nude girlfriend, Selena Gomez.
Though the Biebs' underage nether-regions are covered by a very patriotic maple leaf, this statue may very well be child porn.
In recent years, courts have been extending federal child pornography laws to images created by digital manipulation, including those that depict a child's head on an adult's body.
So even though the 17-year-old took no part in this um, unusual creation, the nude Justin Bieber statue may still violate child pornography laws.
Such laws prohibit the "visual depiction of a person under the age of 18 engaged in sexually explicit conduct." However, such conduct does not require that a child be engaging in sexual activity--only that the image be sexually suggestive.
Even though both Justin and Selena are (thankfully) depicted with some front-side modesty, and strangely accompanied by what appear to be a Canadian goose and an armadillo, would you consider these images to be sexually suggestive?
No? This blogger either, but we may not be its intended target.
Which brings up another valid point:
Who else but underage tween girls would be even remotely enthralled by a nude Justin Bieber statue? It's bad enough that they put his posters on their walls, but do we really need to encourage them to picture him naked?