[alloysteel]

I do not believe this is the argument Cruz was making before the court.

More succinctly, it was the MANNER in which these “sex toys” were being represented to potential purchasers, and not being sufficiently selective in limiting the purchasers to “adult” customers.

That these “sex toys” exist, and perhaps have since the dawn of civilization in some form or another, was not what was being argued. This sales traffic has always been occurring, as excavations of ancient civilizations have shown. But it is to be kept to limited channels, which has always been the part of the social contract, as a condition of doing business. People will still always be people, and some have less self control than others. There is an obligation on the part of the rest of society to divert and provide a means of expressing these urges that do not include sexual assault upon the innocent or unwilling.

[usconservative]

But it is to be kept to limited channels, which has always been the part of the social contract, as a condition of doing business.

Irrelevant! It's the salaciousness of the argument that matters because SEX SELLS!

(Disclaimer: I'm not a Ted Cruz supporter, however I think articles such as this one and the "arguments" they attempt to make are frankly stupid, won't change anyone's mind and in fact only serve to cement certain opinions about the motivations and intent of Trump and/or Cruz supporters when posted. Enough of this stupid crap already!)

[Hugin]

I do not believe this is the argument Cruz was making before the court.

Based on what other than that you don't want it to be true?