The justices have ruled that virtual child pornography is protected by the first amendment. Of course, if they considered original intent it could not be since the men who crafted the first amendment also endorsed and signed obscentiy laws.
What they have done is chipped away at your freedom again and you're loving it. These types of laws are supposed to be left to states and localities. If you believe that scumbags and perverts have an unalienable right to kiddie porn, virtual or otherwise, then you and your fellow residents can vote to do just that.
Me and my fellow residents don't want taht crap anywhere near our kids and grandkids. The ACLU has taken librairies to court forcing them to make porn available on their internet connections. Guess whats coming to your library.
Pedophiles don't have an unalienable right to child pornography and conservatives and libertarians should not be applauding edicts from Washington because they happen to agree with the robes.
IMHO, of course.
Is this an FDR style freedom? "Freedom from want." "Freedom from fear."
How does the Supreme Court saying something is NOT illegal chip away at freedom?
Please refer me to these FEDERAL obscenity laws you refer to.