Here's a link to the writings I quoted from. Does the context change whether Madison believed the First Amendment - where it applied - protected licentiousness by the press?
For example, what instances of licentiousness was he referring to? I mean, since we're talking about obscenity being/not being under First Amendment protection, was he referring to obscenity in American newspapers?
AFAIK, he only says it protects licentiousness by the press, so I'd have to know how the term was understood in 1789.
Also, if Madison and the other Framers really did believe that valid "licentiousness" included obscenity, why did it take until late in the 20th Century for the courts to discover this plain truth?
Are you sure the Court has said "obscenity" is protected? My understanding is that they make a distinction between vulgarity/profanity vs obscenity.
Either way, Madison made it clear that the First Amendment protected at least some degree of licentiousness. If your position is that the First Amendment was meant to protect political and religious speech only, then you are in conflict with Madison.
The Framers (and their successors in American government) allowed certain types of non-religious-non-political speech to be banned. When you have an explanation for that which fits your assertions, get back to me.