California statutes on child pornography is broken up into 5 separate statutes.
California Penal Code 311.1 which is the statute that can be used to prosecute the possession of child pornography does not use the term child abuse nor child exploitation.
California Penal Code 311.3 does use the term sexual exploitation and specifies it is for those under the age of 18. Though this statute only applies to the creation and/or distribution of child pornography, not the possession or viewing of child pornography.
California Penal Code 311.4 which is used to prosecutes individuals who either attempts or gets a minor to perform in child pornography. This statute does not use the term child abuse nor child exploitation.
California Penal Code 311.10 which is used to prosecute individuals in promoting or distributing child pornography. This statute does not use the term child abuse nor child exploitation.
California Penal Code 311.11 which is used to prosecute individuals who possess child pornography. This statute does not use the term child abuse nor child exploitation.
So Orphan Crow by your logic, because the State of California does not specifically correlate child pornography and child abuse or exploitation together except for the creation and distribution of it, then the state of California’s Penal Code has cracks in it and the rest of the house cannot be built on it. That is not what the law is saying. Again just because it doesn’t say it in one part of the penal code doesn’t mean that the legislature doesn’t view it that way, it is dealt with in another part of the code. Just like with Watchtower’s Policy, you have to take the whole policy in total not just a small part or a part of a sentence.