"there would be no practical way to enforce a ban on the domestic consumpiton of imported porn without undermining the Fourth."
You keep making the argument that, since enforcement could not be perfect, we should endorse pornography by making it legal.
That argument has no validity.
We can't stop people from committing any category of crime at all, from cannibalism to mooning. That simply does not constitute grounds to stop trying, or to stop registering our disapproval.
Murder should be illegal, even though there's no way to enforce a ban short of immobilizing everyone alive. Pornography should be illegal, even though there will still be some around. At least those who buy it will understand that they are doing a bad thing.
"Further, I fail to see how it is somehow worse for someone to watch a video of a few couples having sex than for the person to pick up a stranger in a bar for a one-night stand."
It is worse, as a general thing, but before I explain why, let me ask what that comparison has to do with anything? Some crimes are worse than others, but that doesn't mean we should legalize the lesser crimes.
It is worse to watch the video because the people in the video are engaged in prostitution, and when you watch, you become the person paying them to degrade themselves (and put their immortal souls in deadly peril). Futher, they are often being exploited and even extorted into performing.
"I don't think "normal" porn (as opposed to rape porn, child porn, etc.) is the problem."
Nothing is "the" problem. Some things are "a" problem, or a part of a problem, and pornography is certainly an element in our social problems today.
"but there are many, many other factors as well."
That doesn't mean we should endorse any of those elements. We should oppose them all.
"Women's lib has made it much harder to find a good wife, and much riskier to get married."
Too true, too true.
"IMHO, the popularity of alternative sexual outlets is a result of that, rather than the cause."
As with so many things, once the cycle gets running, it is both cause and result, feeding upon itself.
You keep making the argument that, since enforcement could not be perfect, we should endorse pornography by making it legal.
The problem isn't that enforcement won't be perfect. The problem is that enforcement could never realistically catch even 0.1% of violations without serious abridgements of the Bill of Rights.
We can't stop people from committing any category of crime at all, from cannibalism to mooning. That simply does not constitute grounds to stop trying, or to stop registering our disapproval.
If a law cannot be enforced well enough that reasonable punishments will significantly deter the prohibitted activity, that implies pretty strongly that it is a bad law.
It is worse, as a general thing, but before I explain why, let me ask what that comparison has to do with anything? Some crimes are worse than others, but that doesn't mean we should legalize the lesser crimes.
Well, since picking up strangers at a bar is perfectly legal (and IMHO is worse), the question would be why a less-damaging activity should be treated more harshly than a more-damaging one.
It is worse to watch the video because the people in the video are engaged in prostitution, and when you watch, you become the person paying them to degrade themselves (and put their immortal souls in deadly peril). Futher, they are often being exploited and even extorted into performing.
The contribution of one viewer to the industry pales in comparison to the contribution of an individual to the morals of a woman whom he takes on a one-night stand. Being one of many thousands of people to watch a woman perform a particular immoral sex act would seem to pale in comparison with being the one individual with whom a different woman performs an immoral sex act.
As with so many things, once the cycle gets running, it is both cause and result, feeding upon itself.
That is, to some extent, true but I would maintain that attacking symptoms of societal problems is still often ineffective and at times counterproductive. Even if one is successful at completely eliminating a particular symptom, another is almost guaranteed to emerge; in many cases, the new one may be worse than the old one.
The fundamental problem is that women's lib has made the proper method for sexual release (i.e. sex within wedlock) impractical for many people to obtain in timely fashion. Trying to curtail all forms of sexual release is generally neither effective nor helpful. If porn is eliminated, men will release their sexual energies in some other way; I see no reason to expect that to be an improvement.
While it's certainly a positive development that you're recognized that to equate government nonaction with endorsement is an argument that has no validity, you also need to stop actually using the invalid argument.