I think there's something to be said for the stupid things this country puts people on the sex offender list for, but while he may be technically correct in that those people have never harmed anyone, someone who chooses to look at those sorts of things is ####ed in the head.
I'm going to say this as delicately as I possibly can.
This is one biggest pieces of horse#### posts I think I've ever seen, let alone from you.
When a child is forced to have sex with an adult, or even with another child, and that is being filmed, sold, then displayed for adults to watch that child is being harmed. People that watch that filth are patronizing the harm of a child. Hence, they are participating in the harm of these children. So, technically they are harming children by watching the crap.
You can try to justify this in your narrow, sick libertarian way; when you're done, all you've done is justify the abuse of children.
I guaran-damn-tee you that if you had a child that was in a child porn movie, and that movie was all over the internet, you'd want every person that viewed it dealt with by the law. If you don't, then you're even sicker than I think you are at this very moment. If your libertarianism is so deeply rooted in your thinking that everyone is free to do as they please as long as they aren't harming anyone; even when it comes to watching child porn, this makes me really happy I'm not a libertarian in the strict sense of the word. There are lines that aren't crossed; and this one is clearly drawn.