Okay, so you're way off on the burnings. There was a LOT more than porn that was burned. And a LOT more than Nazi literature that was burned.
So now that we've established that you don't know what happened, you can't use that as a parallel or example to support your argument.
So it's really simple: there are people who would prefer such things don't even exist. And if it's valid to say "Then they don't have to read it," it's just as valid to say that "then you don't have to write it." Or "you don't have to publish it." It's a form of morality imposition, forcing those ideals on someone else. It's just as vile.
No one forces anyone to read porn, they choose to be offended by its mere existence.
That is indicative of the mental issue suffered by many who think sex is sacred because a shaman said so. Sex is just sex. Nothing special except for whatever consenting partners may make of it.
No one forces anyone to view human sexuality beyond reproduction as deviant degeneracy. They choose to view it that way because they want to feel something wholesome about their existence.
All in all, it's pretty simple: Some people want a life where what they view as degeneracy is treated as degeneracy. People who want those things don't have to live in that society. They can go form their own country or city or whatever. There's absolutely no reason to stand there and force someone to have something in their society that they view as detrimental.
The perspective of allowing people to do or have whatever they want because "free will" or whatever isn't sacred, it isn't holy, it isn't beyond criticism. It's just as valid to call it "degeneracy" as it is to say that morals based on religion is a farce and it's time for people to recognize that.
Mainly nazi literature.