In today's modern and rapidly developing society, the thought of seeing two adults having sex is still considered taboo. Most Americans shudder at the thought of viewing pornography and dismiss the act as nothing more than an obscene and senseless act. However, the Supreme Court held that pornography should be considered a form of personal expression and should be protected under the First Amendment (New York v. Ferber, 1973). The Supreme Court did not choose to extend the same constitutional protection to child pornography, arguing against its explicit and offensive content. Supreme Court justices have argued that child pornography has no scientific, literary, artistic, or political value; they thought that child pornography material would cause more harm than good if they allowed it to be protected. As society began to change and computer animation technology advanced, a growing question began to form: virtual pornography should be constitutionally protected, based on the argument that it is a form of personal expression and that its content has a scientific, literary, artistic or political significance? value? Unlike real child pornography, which must include two innocent children participating in sexual acts, virtual pornography consists of two computer-generated children engaging in sexual acts. The same logic and arguments used by the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of child pornography cannot be applied to virtual pornography. The pain and suffering that child pornography brings to its victims was a major reason why the First Amendment was not extended to such work; however, virtual pornography has no real-life victims involved in its work. The images are...... middle of paper ...... have the skills and technology necessary to distinguish between virtual and real child pornography. Although the US government has attempted to protect the innocent lives of victims who have been forced to participate in child pornography by extending the law to virtual child pornography, they have failed to adequately articulate the reasons why a law like the CPPA should exist . Ultimately, the Supreme Court justices voted to make virtual child pornography a constitutionally protected form of free speech. Judge O'Connor explains that "the basis for the detention is unclear" and that the basis of their decision is based on the oral arguments made by the government. Only time will tell if there are any negative effects of allowing virtual child pornography to exist, but right now virtual pornography is constitutionally protected by free speech..