Obscenity and alternative points of view are two different things. It is sad we live in a society that is unable to distinguish between the two.

There isn't a bright line between the merely offensive and the "obscene". Even the supreme court couldn't do any better than "I'll know it when I see it". And for that matter, different cultures define obscenity in very different ways. Which one is the objectively correct way?

Expressing an opinion is not obscenity. Showing images for provocation is obescenity. The I know it when I see it argument is ridiculous. The Supreme Court ruled in Miller v. California that obscenity is content that is without socially redeeming value to that which lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Now you can argue the points of what has literary value, but the written word has always had literary value, no matter how grotesque.

We don't burn books in this country.

If I draw a stick-figure and label it The Prophet Muhammad should that be banned? After all my drawing skills are terrible and it is likely to provoke people. But that doesn't seem very free to me.

Given the Supreme Court has said that would have artistic value, you can do what you want.

If you don’t understand the point someone is making please ask follow up questions instead of choosing to interpret it in a way that you can accuse them of being a pedophile