In an ideal world, where moral lines are clearly drawn, I'd agree with you. I agree that there exists a moral standard by which some media is unequivocally immoral and should not exist.

I do not agree that any human effort to perceive this absolute moral standard and act upon it in any way can possibly result in anything but a severely worsening manner. And so I can't condone advocation of censorship efforts -- and not pay other society's censorship efforts respect.

If it were even *possible* for a community to be of one mind against something, then I'd be for it -- in cases where the community was of one mind on it. But if that were the case, the censorship would happen automatically, wouldn't it? Nobody wants American Psycho to influence their lives, then nobody buys it, so nobody sells it, so the author gets nothing, so that's *already* out of that community's lives. However, this kind of unanimity is just not possible. Even in the case of American Psycho. (I join you in denouncing it, but not in doing anything about it beyond simply doing my part as a private citizen in campaigning for a change in social values that would have nothing whatsoever to do with legislation or bureaucracy.) When in the history of the world has one community been of one mind about anything? And in the case of this country -- there's no question we'd botch it. Look at what's being banned in local libraries here. Harry Potter?? Goosebumps?? Why? Because of a few whackos that have never read these books in the first place. But I don't think you were condoning the banning of these specific books but speaking from a more theoretical standpoint. Even so, looking at specific instances of censorship, and how ridiculous they are even if there *were* such a thing as a "good" censorship effort, go a long way in showing how thoroughly botched any effort would be.

The short of it is that I think it's very dangerous to be even so much as sympathetic to censorship efforts, because what they lead to is foreboding indeed.

What I *would* support is a rating-type system such as we have for the MPAA. As screwed up as the MPAA rating system for movies is, it at least does fulfill its primary purpose, which is to fend off efforts to instantiate a government-regulated ratings or outright censorship program. I personally think it would be a good idea for kids to get parental permission before they check out "American Psycho" from the local library, just as they need it to see the movie adaptation. Such a plan would also have the likely benefit of putting a stop to local book banning efforts that, as said article points out, are rampant and out of control.

It would also put the control of material that people consume where it should be: on a personal level. God gave us the freedom, right, and responsibility to choose to do the right thing. We should keep that freedom, right, and responsibility, because that's where it belongs. With us. Not some arbitrary censorship board.