This is a tough circumstance, though - basically the ruling decided that having hand-drawings or journals in a person's possession should receive the same protection as any other form of 'offensive' art . . . think "elephant shit on a picture of the Madonna" as an American example.
I think that the US Supreme Court would have to find similarly, should the case be presented - public morality isn't supposed to be legislated with regard to expression (and thus art), to my knowledge, regardless of how offensive or sick it may seem to you and me.
Threaded Mode