Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
negative implications of internet pornography in the society
the creation of the american constitution
u.s. constitution then and now
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.(Wallace: 3)
A statement from a document that a group of individuals put together to ensure
their own ideas and beliefs would never change. The group of people was the
forefathers of the United States of America and that document: The United
States Constitution. That phrase was put into the Constitution because our
forefathers wanted to protect their freedom of speech. Something they
cherished and something that in days previous was squashed by ruling government.
Today our freedom of speech is in danger again.
The Government is now trying to censor what ideas go onto something we know as
the Information Superhighway. The Internet is now supposed to be regulated so
that it will be "safe" for everyone to enter. The Government passed a law known
as the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In the TA there is a part called the
Communications Decency Act or CDA. This part of the bill arose because of the
recent surge of pornography on the Infobahn. The CDA criminalizes indecent
speech on the Internet(Wallace: 1). The CDA describes indecent speech as
anything "depicting or describing sexual or excretory acts or organs in
patently offensive fashion under contemporary community standards."
First take the word "indecent". This word is used because of its vague
definition. Not only does this word ban sexually explicit materials, it also
bans sexually explicit words too. If this were applied to the real world some
of the greatest novels would be take...
... middle of paper ...
...8.
Emigh, Jacqueline. "Computers & Privacy - Telecom Act Hits ISPs Hard
04/02/96." Computers & Privacy. 02 Apr. 1996.
(18 Jun.
1996).
GMoney. Online Personal Interview. washington.dc.us.undernet.org/port=6667 (20
Jun. 1996).
Jerome, Richard and Linda Kramer. "Monkey Business No More." People Weekly 19
Feb. 1996: 51+.
Lester, Meera. "What's Your Code of Ethics?" _VJF_Library_Career_Resources:
What's Your Code of Ethics? 1996.
(29 Jun. 1996).
Lohr, Steve. "Censorship on the Internet: Pre-emptory Effort At Self-Policing,"
New York Times 13 March 1996, sec. C: 3.
Wallace, Jonathan and Mark Mangan. "The Internet Censorship FAQ." The Internet
Censorship FAQ. 1996. (29 Jun.
1996).
Another example in history where the government used censorship to prevent the spread of new ideas occurred about a hundred years later. ...
Pornography is considered by many to be an unwelcome and distasteful part of our society. However, I argue that it is necessary to voice the unpopular viewpoints, under the Constitution. This paper is a defense of pornography as a constitutional right of free expression, under the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. In illustrating this argument, I will first define pornography as a concept, and then address central arguments in favor of pornography remaining legal and relatively unregulated – such as the development of the pornography debate throughout modern US law, and how activist groups address the censorship of adult entertainment.
The censorship of ideas is seen, not only on American soil, but in other countries, both now and in history. In a world where governments are to be respected, to think in a contradictory manner is anything but safe. All throughout history, ideological governmen...
First Amendment: Freedom of Religion, of Speech, of the Press, of Peaceful Assembly, and the Right to Petition
abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people
Imagine a place where you have access to anything and everything one could want. Some would say that is only existent in a utopia, and some would say that describes the Internet. Many adults go on to the net and access pornographic material that would be unsuitable for children. This is called cyberporn. The controversy lies in the fact that children are accessing these materials also. Government, activist groups, and concerned parents are fighting to regulate obscene material found over the Internet to protect children. The first amendment is the only thing protecting adults from losing their rights to obtain pornographic or indecent material on the net. Under the first amendment the government must not regulate cyberporn. Online sex has been around since the first bulletin boards were available over the computer in the early 1980's. People would pay to down load pornographic pictures and talk dirty to each other. Usenet groups took control of porn after the Internet came about. They did not charge people to down load picture and to interact with others. In result, Internet porn grew (Rosen 16). Things have changed drastically since then with over a million different sites available to access porn. Now it is not just for adults. Children are accessing the obscene materials. This brings rise to issues of how to protect them from problems that can arise. The materials they view, could influence children. They could also be subjected to cybersex in a chat room full of people that could be three times their age. Worst of all pedophilias could influence children to meet with them outside of the computer. The government and the United States citizens must now figure out how to protect our children from the effects of cyberporn, and y...
Don't Censor Child Pornography. In November of 1997, a Williamson County, Tenn. grand jury indicted Barnes & Noble booksellers for violating state obscenity laws prohibiting the display of "material harmful to minors. " The materials in question were two books that featured photographs of nude children: Jock Sturges' Radiant Identities and David Hamilton's The Age of Innocence. Since then, Radical Right activist Randall Terry has launched a crusade aimed at forcing bookstores to remove the "criminal garbage" of Sturges, Hamilton and (recently added to his list of demons)
First Amendment protections were upheld in the case of Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) (Reno, 1997). The Communications Decency Act of 1996 was found to violate the First Amendment’s protection of freedom of speech. In appealing the CDA, appellees were hoping that the court would determine that the CDA violated both First and Fifth Amendment rights. While the court agreed that the CDA violated First Amendment rights, they did not rule on the issue of Fifth Amendment rights violations. Both constitutional and criminal issues were being addressed in this appeal.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 can be termed as a major overhaul of the communications law in the past sixty-two years. The main aim of this Act is to enable any communications firm to enter the market and compete against one another based on fair and just practices (“The Telecommunications Act 1996,” The Federal Communications Commission). This Act has the potential to radically change the lives of the people in a number of different ways. For instance it has affected the telephone services both local and long distance, cable programming and other video services, broadcast services and services provided to schools. The Federal Communications Commission has actively endorsed this Act and has worked towards the enforcement and implementation of the various clauses listed in the document. The Act was basically brought into existence in order to promote competition and reduce regulation so that lower prices and higher quality services for the Americans consumers may be secured.
When deliberating over whether access to pornography should be prohibited, four areas of contention must be elaborated upon and evaluated critically to provide a sensible basis on which a judgement can be made. Firstly, it must be concluded whether pornography can be classed as a form of speech, and whether it enjoys the same protections as art and literature under the principle. Secondly, works such as those of Catherine MacKinnon can be drawn upon to offer a feminist perspective of the effects of pornography on the treatment of women within modern democratic society. Moreover, the principles of Devlin and Feinberg offer relevant acumen regarding the criminalisation of pornographic media. Overall, this essay will argue that whilst access to pornography should not be entirely prohibited; publications that depict ‘extreme’ situations should be subject to regulation and restriction.
Since the internet has been available in schools and libraries in this country, there has been a debate about what should be accessible to users, especially minors. The amount of information disseminated on the world wide web is vast, with some sources valuable for scholarly and personal research and entertainment, and some sources that contain material that is objectionable to some (ie. pornography, gambling, hate groups sites, violent materials). Some information potentially accessible on the internet such as child pornography and obscenity is strictly illegal and is not protected under the First Amendment. Some information available on the internet that may be valuable to some is at the same time perceived to be worthless or potentially harmful to some. For libraries serving the public, there has been controversy on the issue of providing the internet, free of censorship or filtering, to users. While some librarians and their professional associations align with ideals of free and unfiltered access to all information provided by the internet, some feel that filtering internet content to exclude possibly objectionable materials is a reasonable measure to prevent potential harm to minors.
Witherbee, Amy and Cushman, C. Ames. "Counterpoint: Sometimes Censorship is Necessary." 2011. Points of View Reference Center. Web. 21 March 2012.
The government should not control the content of television shows and limit the amount of weekly violence shown. The responsibility of controlling the viewing of television shows expressing acts of violence should specifically be in the hands of parents. Parents are becoming too reliant upon governmental provisions with respect to raising their children and television violence is becoming an excuse for criminal acts. Children, especially younger children, are impressionable, but with proper guidance from a parental source in regards to television viewing, kids are not likely to act out violent television images.
governments. Censorship is closely tied in as a concept with freedom of speech and other forms
Unknown Author. An Overview of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). Center for Democracy & Technology. Retrieved 26 April 2004.