[lelio]

If you approve, you approve of the power of an un-elected elite to reduce your power as a citizen.
That's an interesting point which was brought up on a recent PBS show about NAFTA: that Canada or Mexico can sue the US (or vice versa) to repeal laws in the US that prevent their products from coming in. Example of a US company taking over a Mexican waste dump but not wanting to play by the local rules.
However I believe that the right of citizens to look at images (digital pictures, drawings, etc) should trump any desire of the majority to make a more 'moral' society.

[moneyrunner]

”However I believe that the right of citizens to look at images (digital pictures, drawings, etc) should trump any desire of the majority to make a more 'moral' society.”

That may be so, and I’m sure that people who get off on porn agree with you. However, there is no reason that the desires of “People for Porn” should trump the desires of those who do not wish to have it shoved in their faces and the faces of their families. Citizens, acting in concert, have a great deal of discretion in managing their environment. They do it all the time in regards to zoning laws, the construction of public works, public nuisance laws, environmental regulations, etc. Before the passage of many of the environmental regulations we operate under today, many people argued that government did not have the power to regulate pollutants. That is no longer an argument that holds much credence. Today, the argument is over the efficacy of those regulations and in discussions of cost/benefit relationships.

Thanks to the intellectual pollution that inundates our society, I predict that a backlash is coming, there will be regulation of intellectual pollution, and the discussion in the future will be in the cost/benefit relationships.