Believe it or not, artificial intelligence-generated child pornography is completely unrestricted under the laws of at least 12 states. It is allowed in at least some form in many other states.

Unfortunately, we live in a world where some people want to normalize such depravity. The perverts — who of course prefer the label "minor attracted persons" — style themselves as an oppressed sexual minority, subject to undue stigmatization and discrimination. And there is already a lobbying campaign underway — not just by fringe groups, but by legitimately big-deal academics and researchers — to gain acceptance for their perversion.

By the reckoning of Fred Berlin, director of the Johns Hopkins Sex and Gender Clinic, pedophiles "have discovered through no fault of their own that this is the nature of what they’re afflicted with in terms of their own sexual makeup. ... We’re talking about not giving into a craving, a craving that is rooted in biology, not unlike somebody who’s having a craving for heroin.”

As Wired noted nearly two years ago, when it interviewed Berlin, "Some clinicians and researchers have suggested that AI-generated images can be used to rehabilitate certain pedophiles, by allowing them to gain the sexual catharsis they would otherwise get from watching child pornography from generated images instead."

In other words, mainstream academics have already been making the case for years that watching AI child pornography will supposedly curb predators' appetite for preying on real children.

It seems much more likely that, when the studies are all done, rates of child sexual abuse will be much higher in places where such AI material is more widespread. The more such material in circulation, the more adults will be affected by it. But will the arguments of Berlin and others convince anyone? Will they convince our legal system?

The Supreme Court has fortunately

© The Hill