I find it reasonable that we should be able to regulate filth speech without the slippery slope.
Pornography has no value as social or political speech; no meaning. It is in the same category as yelling superlatives at the cashier. All freedoms do have their limits, and I know you’d agree to that. It is VERY easy to separate pornography from art and other forms of expression. Mere nudity/sexuality in art is not pornography. It is common sense to be able to separate an actual attempt to analyze human sexuality through the medium of art and porn.
You say,
“As disgusting as I find pornography I don’t think it should be outlawed because the men and women involved in it are adults and made their own decisions to get involved with it.”
What you’re really saying is that porn leaves you with an icky feeling; but it’s not really that wrong; It doesn’t harm those involved in it and those who watch it. Yes, they are grown ups. Yes, they do consent to it. But human beings consent to all types of things in the world that are harmful for them. Crack cocaine anyone? Teenage suicide? Now most laws, crimes, and acts of immorality are committed against unwilling participants, but not in all cases. Mere consent does not a moral act make.
Beyond that, it’s well known that the pornography industry is very seedy. The majority of it’s actors are young girls who enter into the business for the same reason that prostitutes enter into prostitution; they’re desperate and poor.
I’ve always thought it odd that the difference between prostitution and pornography was video evidence.
