Access to wicked porn sites not human rights

I have checked the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and other associated documents. I do not think the access to pornography which normalises rape, pedophilia, incestous intercourse or bestiality is a provision of 'human rights'. I also do not think anyone can cite or quote a sentence or paragraph from Adam Smith' s Wealth of Nations to rationalise those wicked porn sites as an institution of 'free trade'. As the precedents in Europe, Australia and New Zealand have already shown, restricting those sites would not lead any society to 'selfdom'. On the contrary, the good intention of some libertarians who oppose net filtering in toto may pave the roads that would lead us all to 'hell'.

Moral responsibility now shifts to libertarians