NEW YORK — In a program earlier this week, Oprah Winfrey put the weight of her TV talk show behind passage of Senate Bill 1728, entitled the “Combating Child Exploitation Act of 2007.” MIM President Robert Peters [pictured] had the following comments:

On its face, Senate Bill 1728 is a laudable effort to curb sexual exploitation of children. Republican Senator Coburn, however, has objected to the Bill because it spends too much money. Senate Majority Leader Reid is now also attempting to make political mileage from the Bill by attaching it to package of unrelated bills. Oprah Winfrey’s motives have also been questioned since the Bill’s prime sponsor is Joe Biden and Barack Obama is a co-sponsor.

If S. 1728 comes up for a vote, it will pass easily because Congress can’t do enough to curb sexual abuse of children. But if Congress is ready to spend hundreds of millions of additional dollars to curb sexual abuse of children, why doesn’t it also spend several million to fight “adult” obscenity?

When I say “adult” obscenity, I am talking about hardcore pornography that does not depict actual children under age 18. Adult obscenity, however, does depict youth who are 18 to 19 and who often look even younger. A citizen complaint made recently to the www.ObscenityCrimes.org tip line included links for “XXX Teen Movies” and “Hardcore Real Babysitter Videos.”

For the most part, the Justice Department and FBI focus almost exclusively on child pornography and predators. The refusal to devote little more than token resources to the war against adult obscenity, however, is undermining government efforts to curb sexual exploitation of children.

The explosion of adult obscenity contributes to sexual exploitation of children in a number of ways. First, child molesters use adult obscenity to arouse, desensitize and instruct their child victims. See, e.g., K. Lanning, “Child Molesters: A Behavioral Analysis,” National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, pp. 55-57, 70 (2001).

Second, many men arrested on sexual exploitation of children charges begin their downward spiral by viewing not child pornography but adult obscenity. See, e.g., L. Michel & D. Herbeck, “Confessions of a child porn addict” (Buffalo News, 10/17/07), where we read:

“Clarence once enjoyed the adult pornography sites he viewed on the Web. But after a while, the thrill was gone. So he started clicking on some of the ads that popped up on his computer above the naked adults he was watching. He was seeing something new – young teenagers and even young children, posing in the nude, having sex with each other, or being molested by adults. At first, [Clarence] was appalled. But once the shock wore off, he couldn’t get enough. Like thousands of other men…he was hooked.”

Third, many men who are addicted to adult obscenity use prostitutes to act out their porn fueled fantasies. See, e.g., J.W. Kennedy, “Help for the Sexually Desperate” (Christianity Today, Mar. 2008) (“Viewing pornography is nearly always accompanied by masturbation…’If a guy masturbates to something it would take a prostitute to do, he’s more likely to find one.'”). To the extent that addiction to pornography helps maintain or increase the demand for prostitutes, it also helps maintain or increase the demand for children trafficked into prostitution.

Fourth, addiction to adult obscenity is also destroying countless marriages, which puts children at greater risk for sexual abuse. See, e.g., “One-parent Households Double Risk of Child Sexual Abuse,” ScienceDaily.com, 3/14/07.

In addition to protecting children from sexual exploitation, the Justice Department and FBI should also be doing all they can to protect children from exposure to Internet obscenity. In the late 1990s, Congress twice enacted legislation to protect children from Internet pornography, but the Supreme Court invalidated the CDA in 1997, and COPA has been tied up in the courts since 1998.

The Congressionally created COPA Commission concluded in its October 2000 Final Report: “Law enforcement resources at the state and federal level have focused nearly exclusively on child pornography and child stalking. We believe that an aggressive effort to address illegal, obscene material on the Internet will also address the presence of harmful to minors material.”

Unfortunately, S. 1728 does not authorize one nickel for combating illegal obscene material.