We are. You happen to be in a not-so-free state.
Now, the beauty of federalism is ... you can move to another state if this issue is that important to you!
Certainly the people of South Carolina can decide through the legislative process how they want to live. You wouldn't deny them that, would you?
Are you saying that you should you be allowed to force your perversions on them in the name of "freedom"? What, freedom for me but not for thee?
Your argument only makes sense if the law was stating you had to buy sex toys when you didn't want them. If you don't want them, don't buy them. If you want them, there should be no prohibtion against buying them: like cigarettes, I suppose.
While I disagree with this law as a general principle because it's heavy-handed nanny-statism, I agree with your comments because I do like the idea of states' rights.
The states should be able to regulate the moral and legal tone that represents the will of the people in those states -- including regulation of abortion, legalization of marijuana, etc.
If we're going to believe in a principle, we need to be consistent.
"We are...."
That's right, we're free to do whatever the government lets us do.
So your position is that the private ownership of sex toys by others is somehow forcing perversion on you?
Nope. They have a right to decide as individuals how they want to live; no more.
So selling them is forcing perversions on people now? So that would mean that selling guns is forcing death on people (if you are anti-gun person) or selling tobacco is forcing people to smoke or selling burgers and junk food is forcing people to become fat? Get a grip.