The bottom line w/that scenario is that the most important societal laws Christians can invest in producing are those protecting the young. Although in my original mention of porn I said teens and young adults, certainly young adults can fend for themselves whereas I don't think we should leave pre-teens and hormonal-laced teens to fend for themselves when it comes to what can be an overwhelming onslaught of images; otherwise, hard-core porn-sellers right next to high schools? (like I've seen in CA) Well who cares from a Xtian perspective?
But, of course, you only addressed porn as it pertained to those who can fend for themselves. Do we not share a corporate responsibility to deflect some of the vice industries from easy access to our young people?
If a Christian is "bothered" by porn, what he needs is not a porn law. And a porn law will not address his sin problem.
Let's see if we can drive with parallel applications of this principle: "If a Christian is 'tempted' by an abortion, what she needs is not a pro-life law. And a pro-life law will not address her sin problem."
Okay, if my scenarios up til now are "not how I think" then please explain what folks are supposed to derive from statements where you may say that porn laws (or pro-life laws) won't address folks' sin problems.
Her baby does.