Swift on Community 2

(I don't know if I'm supposed to be blogging on this section or not......)
On pages 158-160, Swift talks about the difference between neutralist and perfectionist liberalism. He claims that the neutralist, unlike the perfectionist, will only allow for state intervention in areas where others are being harmed by individuals' free choices, but not because any kinds of actions are actually 'intrinsically evil.' He brings up the case of pornography, for example, saying that it could be banned by the state in the case of it harming women, but not due to the evils it inflicts on those who use it. However, this viewpoint seems problematic, because it does not give any support for how the harm arises if there is nothing inherently wrong with pornography. If it is freely entered into by both the women and those purchasing the materials, then how can one say that it harms women in any way without bringing in some kind of objective sexual morality, which would then apply to both sides? It seems that they are missing the connection between what is bad and what is harmful, perhaps trying to say that what is harmful is not inherently so, but simply so for that individual or group of individuals. However, it still seems that harmfulness must be connected to evil in some way, meaning that the lines will eventually be blurred between the state taking action on moral grounds and it taking action on the grounds of 'justice' for its citizens.