Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
felt safe. Accordingly, we find that § 1040.18a promotes a compelling State interest as applied to Appellant. 133 As compelling as the State's interest of protecting minors is in the present case, the statutory provision must still be narrowly drawn to serve those interests if the provisions is to withstand constitutional scrutiny. Sable, 492 U.S. at 126-27, 109 S.Ct. at 2886-37. The statute must be carefully tailored to achieve those ends without unnecessarily interfering with First Amendment freedoms. Id., 492 U.S. at 126, 109 S.Ct. at 2886-87. This standard necessarily disfavors a blanket ban or complete prohibition. United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, 529 U.S. 803, 813-14, 120 S.Ct. 1878, 1886-87, 146 L.Ed.2d 865 (2000); Sable, 492 U.S. at 127-28, 109 S.Ct. at 2887-88 ; Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that section 33021b was overbroad because it prohibited a wide array of constitutionally protected speech and was not drawn narrowly enough to achieve only the legitimate objective of protecting children from sexual abuse
B. holding total ban on indecent dialaporn telephone communications not narrowly drawn to serve the governments compelling interest in protecting children
C. holding that the governments interest in the welfare of children embraces not only protecting children from physical abuse but also protecting childrens interest in the privacy and dignity of their homes and in the lawfully exercised authority of their parents
D. holding on summary judgment that a regulation is narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest
E. holding the online solicitation statute was not narrowly drawn to effectuate a compelling state interest and there were more narrow means of achieving the states interest in protecting minors
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.