I suppose a nation that doesn't value children enough to protect them in the womb or from diverse "family" settings that damage their psychological development wouldn't find it necessary to to protect them from sexual harms either.
The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to revive the Child Online Protection Act, designed to protect children from sexual material and other objectionable content on the Internet.
"Why is it that the Constitution allows adults to give pornography to children?" he asks. "Point me in the direction of that provision in the Constitution. It does not exist."
He then goes on to point out the inconsistency of prosecuting adults who produce it, but ignoring the distribution of it to children. Sadly enough, that inconsistency will most likely be taken care of by liberalising the laws on porn, allowing more and more depravity on every level. Oremus.