4) Mill Stuart's ideas on freedom of ideas may be better choice. Though it doesn't completely agrees with it, it does agree with the idea of allowing the free flow of ideas so for complete human development as one doesn't know what will turn out to be beneficial for human beings in future. Thus human beings, their society and their civilization to complete flourish, free flow of all kinds of ideas should be allowed
5) If we give value to free expression, then any law prohibiting free expression or dictating to people to live their lives in certain manners should be prohibited/banned. However, it can argued that certain free expression may lead to social destruction, and thus the law continues to be implemented. But then, we don't know, as Mill's said, what sort of ideas will be beneficial for human beings and what shouldn't be. And thus for complete development, all ideas must be allowed to be circulated.
6) But in order to ban pornography one needs to being in evidence showing the harm caused by increase of pornography. However, the committee has been unable to bring in any such evidence. Restriction is not much of problem as it doesn't seriously curtail the ideas that pornography might contribute to society
7) This report is goal based. It seeks not a definite goal but a goal where most people have what they want. It doesn't consider pornography outright wrong, crude and disgusting but doesn't admit that it is a less desirable contributor to intellectual development. It assumes that society, with allowance of free flow, will make intelligent ideas of what is good for them and live accordingly. But it admit that not all ideas are conducive to human development or will produce the best society some time in future, thus some curtailment and restriction of pornography must be practiced.
8) Why should live sex be prohibited' Is complete ban of live sex, supported by the report' If yes, why' What the report says bring forth the idea that it is because "others" (those not involved, neither audience or performers) suffer from mental distress knowing that other people are involved in it. But the report had, initially rejected all harms of mental nature. And if people should stop doing what they want to do, only because others don't like it, it means that they don't have complete liberty to live their lives as they wish. --- This cannot be true or supported by the report that " others" find it degrading. It is supports its ban because it is indeed degrading. That means it can lead to cultural pollution. However, the report does admit that it takes place so rarely that its effect would be minimum. Thirdly, in its case, slippery slop argument will be too strong. However, writer finds no strong argument to ban it. It believes that's the live sex is intolerable even in restricted form, should be banned even wen the committee have no strong argument against it.
9) Why prohibit some material and restrict another' In case of restriction of open advertising, it offers 3 arguments in its favor. 1) More harm in public display than personal consumption 2) cultural pollution is greater 3) the slippery slope is less of a danger because material of any value is still be exchanged, though privately.
10) Considering argument number 1) by limiting the pornographic material to those who want it, does not defeat the purpose of its publication that is valuable exchange of ideas still takes place, except lesser income for its author.