I just don't read the law like that. It's not that I'm not comfortable with it, it doesn't make any sense to me. I read it as visually depicting a person under 18 is child pornography. Acting under 18 with a script, outfit and props in a porn visually depicts the actress as being under 18. If she was 18 and was part of a regular porn, even if she looked younger but wasn't scripted as such, would be fine. It clearly though is their intent to depict the actresses as under 18. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari