The huge difference I keep seeing between Libertarian arguments on FR and conservative ones is that Libertarians use their principles to deny any responsibility for their society. They seem to think there are only two options to a story like Michelle's. One is to shake your head at her and say, "Bad choice, girl. Tough luck!" The other is to create a set of laws to make her tragedy impossible.
Conservatives accept a personal responsibility for the good of society, where possible. Conservatives will take the third option. Don't use porn. Discourage others from using porn. Tell the story far and wide to create a social stigma to anyone supporting the porn industry. Use social compulsion to put the pornographers back on skid row where they belong.
Nobody would be hurt if porn were to go away, and many would be helped. A true conservative understands this, and condemns the porn industry without requiring laws to be written.
That doesn't take a government program, but it does require that you put society higher on your personal priority list. That doesn't sit well with the modern American.
Shalom.
Unfortunately, too few "true conservatives" are willing to put forth any effort to deal with their false brethren who are attempting to get coercive laws written. (The analogy to the Muslim community is painfully obvious.)
That's it in a nutshell.
This small "l" libertarian has no problem with this approach, or any approach that does not use the force of government. To give another example, I don't believe in anti-discrimination laws, but you better believe I'd protest against and boycott any company that didn't hire someone solely because of the color of their skin.
If someone doesn't want to criminalize something, it does not mean they support it or are indifferent on the matter.