I "get" that you don't "get" the idea underlying the First Amendment

[stevenleser]

98. Perhaps, but political speech and consensual intimate behavior by adults in private are intrinsic

parts of free speech and freedom of expression.

Take either one away and the rest of the free speech you think you have is meaningless.

That's why on the one side you can accuse any elected official of the most heinous things even if you know it isn't true without a care of libel or slander. Even though I don't take political discussion nearly that far, I understand why it's important to have that protection.

On the other side, I have no interest in being in a state where the government tells consenting adults the kind of sex they can have. Similarly with the political argument, even though my particular practices are so tame and mainstream as to never be in danger of being made illegal, I understand why it's important to have that protection.

And no, I don't believe that folks arguing against porn don't also want their position enshrined in law. Folks who engage in the kinds of heinous debate practices that some of these folks are engaging in aren't going to be satisfied with "making folks think about it". They want a complete ban on porn. That's obvious to anyone paying attention.