Formerly married (to a man!) Had two sons. Now married (to corrupt the term) with a woman. Oh, I don't know.
Porn and drugs both have corrosive effects on a healthy society; however, so do heavy-handed government initiatives intended to cure them. No legislation will ever fully eliminate either porn or drugs and efforts to enforce the same will net a lot of innocents. In a healthy, moral society, those who choose to purvey or indulge in drugs or smut marginalize themselves, but in a morally dysfunctional society they are lionized.
During prohibition, booze ran freely amongst those who abused it most, and rumrunners and gangsters often receied public acclaim while the person who wanted to simply enjoy a glass of wine with dinner or a beer after work risked making themselves federal criminals. Similarly, attempts to define pornography will frequently entail language that would (and have) banned Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter and Degas nudes. While aestheticians and moral philosophers might tend to distinguish an artistic nude as something that celebrates and elevates the human form while porn is something that is designed to appeal to the basest most prurient interests. The problem is, different people will respond to the same film, painting, photo or sculpture in very different ways and community standards work only in as much as the community has standards.
The answer lies not in open license or in draconian legislation, but in the moral restraint and judgment exercised by every individual. A community, town, state or nation composed of persons with generally strong moral standards will easily survive the ills that are forced to remain in the shadows. Those communities without a sense of moral virtue will be consumed by their basest instincts regardless of the laws they pass.