Often, correspondents support their opinions on topical issues (in this case "the censorship of artistic projects") with what I consider illogical arguments.

For instance, "being married and having children" does not make you immune to any level of obscenity or violence that may be portrayed in artistic productions.

If "a more objectionable play escaped the censors' ban", then that may have been a mistake. But it does not automatically warrant the elimination of all censorship.

We have our own minds to decide what is acceptable or not to us. We do not just do what "all other civilised European countries" do.

The fact that "we are living in 2009" or " in this day and age we have easy access to a wide range of vile scenes on TV and the internet" does not have any bearing on whether or not a locally produced artistic project, if found that it may have a negative effect on some part or the whole of society, should go on unhindered and contribute to the damage being done by TV and the internet.

I would rather sacrifice an artistic production than live in a society that gradually becomes immune to any level of obscenity, perversity, masochism or violence.