Their rationale' and justification can be easily summarized: All visual, printed and audio materials must be suitable for the average 8-year old - - heaven forbid there should be any consideration of human adult sexuality. George Orwell may have been off by 20 years but Big Brother and the Thought Police are just down the street from your house and creeps like Dobson, Falwell and their colleagues are in command.
What a rant!
The simple truth is some folks are inclined to favor a decent society in which to raise their children without being exposed to promiscuous unbridled sexuality at every turn because smut peddlers are protected under the freedom of speech clause.
We just want to be able to go to the 7-11 without a copy of sluts-r-us on display out in the open at children eye level! or search the web for homework research without 1000 hits for sluts-r-us websites flashing across the monitor.
What's wrong with making pornography harder to access for children?!? Instead of .com, .org, etc. designate all adult material .xxx so we can elect not to be exposed to it!
A response you pro-pornography types is to equate it with free speech and declare that any attempt to suppress it would lead to tyranny.
Gee, that's odd. Like I said earlier, I have no recollection of pre-"Deep Throat" America being any kind of a police state. Even before "I Am Curios - Yellow", we seemed to have plenty of rights and freedoms. So your equation of suppression of porn with political repression is ridiculous.
Obscenity laws that were freely created by democratic consent of the governed to protect their families and communities were struck down by ACLU lawyers backed up by Hollywood and activist judges. THAT is what got us to this pass.