Yes, it's better to let emotional responses take over when debating serious issues of this type, distort statements made by anyone who dares to mention the subject, attack people's character for daring to use logic in their arguments,  etc. Reasoned argument is overrated anyways, and most people are no good at it, so it's hardly fair. This will lead to a better world and you'll stop child porn in no time. /end sarcasm

And since it's clear you didn't understand his point about heroin, I don't think it was about what damage it does to the taker (I haven't read a lot of Vitalik's writing, but what little I have would strongly argue against that). I'm reasonably sure without further investigation that he's referring to dangers to others that are posed by drug users who don't take proper care to ensure they don't harm others when in an impaired state (e.g. similar to drunk driving).

Logical discussions about this should only come to one conclusion, that it is wrong for the child porno to even exist.  It exists because someone did the act while someone else videoed it, or the person doing the act videoed himself or herself while doing the act.