So many lies, so little time.
I sympathize with the author’s concerns, but this article is embarrassingly simplistic. The author confuses pornography with obscenity, assumes correlation is the same as causation, and, I may be wrong about this, seems to pine for a situation in which a “minority” (his word) of which he is a member could enjoy certain constitutional protections to a degree greater than, presumably, a majority. I always thought this was a libtard strategy.
Unfortunately, the government has abandoned enforcement of laws against obscenity. Its sole focus now seems to be on child pornography (which like obscenity has no constitutional protection). Just in the nature of how things seem to go, I fear that if laws against obscenity are not enforced, pedophiles will become increasingly vocal in insisting that they have a “right” to view child pornography, essentially attacking the established legal standard that pornography involving minors is in itself obscene. You know, incrementally, which is now way too fast for me.