As I said: I mean you need data it in general. It’s NOT necessary to dig it up. I do NOT complain that you didn’t linked studies. I say: In GENERAL you need a tangible basis if you want to issue a law.
Which basis has this assumption?
Striving for the highest quality in the long term = Moral
Implicitly you supported this view – at least partially – when you said: Forbid porn because it leads to addiction, cheapening of sex and broken families. (I know you considered “god arguments” too but not only.) You said: Do some research. Find evidence that it causes psychological hurt.
On a more abstract level you said: Forbid porn because it leads to a decrease of quality of life.
You said: porn-prohibition is morally correct because porn-prohibition increase quality of life
of yourself or of other conscious beings in the long term.
It’s kind of axiomatic. What is moral good for? What is moral?
Moral is a set of behaviour guidelines. To what end?
To be able to practice good behaviour. But which behaviour is GOOD?
Behaviour is good, if it leads to an increase of wellbeing/quality of life/happiness… for one’s self or for other beings in the longterm. What else?
So, can you support the assumption:
Basis of moral is the endeavour to increase quality of life of yourself or of other conscious beings (long term)?
If not - Why?