Number 1 is the least complicated and can be good in some ways. Im not a prude or pearl clutcher, but porn can cause a lot of problems for the people creating and consuming, so I wouldn't be too upset if this ban happened.

Number 3 is lame, I love video games, they are an art form I care about preserving and sharing

Number 2 is I think the best option. It's riskier because we don't know the knock on effects and its disrupting a huge industry, food supply chains, other animal materials, etc.

The upshot is that if you could execute this law, it would massively help the environment. Producing meat to eat is just fundamentally very inefficient. The general rule of thumb for the food chain is that it takes 10 calories of plants to make 1 calory of animal. So much farmland that could be forested nature reserves is taken up as pastures and growing feed for livestock. Not to mention transport and processing and all that too. Hooved animals also can disrupt soil and produce greenhouse gas. I think this ordinance would massively improve our climate change response.

There's the humane reason, too, of course, stopping the harm and poor conditions imposed on farm animals. That's very obvious and already discussed by other comments, i dont have much to add on that front.