Setting aside the author's clear but oblivious bias in the English speakers "war", he documents a fascinating problem: how do we globally integrate societies that have very starkly different reactions to specific topics, ideas, etc? We aren't even good at answering these questions within the same culture (liberty vs discrimination, public safety vs 2nd amendment, 'Red' vs 'Blue', and so on).

Given the internet's existence, the lowering barriers to trade, immigration, and travel, Pandora's box isn't going to be closed here- we need to figure out how to approach the topic of cross-cultural disagreement on moral quandaries. And it's not fair to just say "Our culture is right and theirs is wrong". That just demeans them and silences the minority.

My favorite example: I go to a small men's barber shop usually staffed by two or three male barbers. A woman enters saying "I want a man's haircut". All three barbers are devout Muslims who cannot touch a woman, by their religious beliefs. Yet the customer has a right to be served even though she is female. This isn't hypothetical, it really happened. They sorted it out amicably, but this sure could have gone to court- where a decision would probably be made that makes a lot of people angry.

In the case of "ロリコン and 児童ポルノ", can Western culture even perceive that a difference might exist? Or are we bound by laws that grew out of our cultural view that the two are both the same horrible concept?