Please stop censoring people for posting images that some individuals find offensive for reasons that are, well, let's be honest here, the reasons are entirely subjective.
For example - I find images of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan to be loathsome and offensive. Does that mean you'll start banning images of political candidates?
The line between art and pornography is arbitrary at best and subjective at worst. This is true of many of our categorizations. A prime example: the difference between free speech and a threat of violence is often determined by the forum in which it is presented as well as through the character and occupation of the presenter. Ted Nungent telling President Obama to suck on his assault rifle (homosexual subtext aside) is an example of something that was ruled as free speech because the general population considered Ted Nungent to be incapable of unlikely to turn his words into action.
With this in mind, there is a happy medium. A compromise, as much as that has become a dirty word in American culture today. By placing an option on an individual's account settings that would filter anything listed as "possibly offensive" or "adult". A further addition in the form of being able to flag one's entire stream of posts as "possibly offensive" would save those of us who just generally piss others off the trouble of having to selectively tag our posts for this automated filter you could very easily create.
Then everyone is happy - except the control freaks who simply enjoy forcing others into their moralistic or cultural paradigm.
Please stand up for organizing, rather than banning, the world's information - you know, kind of like what Google originally set out to do.
PS - Please stop banning +Moan Lisa
or any related accounts. #freemoanlisa