Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Limitation on freedom of speech
Pornography and society
Pornography & it's effect on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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.
Freedom of speech is archetypally recognised as a basic human right in free and democratic societies. When contending whether speech that may be deemed offensive should be safeguarded one may refer to the judgement of Redmond-Bate v. DPP:
"Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence..."
Any speech therefore, however disagreeable it may be; that does not incite violence must be allowed in our society. One must then consider whether pornography may be classed as speech. Nadine Gourgey argues that speech is not solely defined as the communication of information, but rather encompasses any act made by a party that which can be viewed and comprehended by another. Gourgey states that if porno...
... middle of paper ...
...d, John Stuart Mill and the Harm of Pornography, “Ethics”, vol. 102, n. 3, 1992, pp. 534-55
John Stuart Mill, The Subjection of Women, 1869
Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s 63(6)(b)
Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 s 63(7)
Stevens J, Opinion of the Court, Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997) [1]
Obscene Publications Act, 1959 s1
Lord Devlin P. The Enforcement of Morals, 1959
JS Mill, On Liberty in JS Mill, On Liberty, Considerations on Representative Government, 158
Barnett H, Introduction to Feminist Jurisprudence, Cavendish Publishing, (1998), 281
Yien Ee C., Pornography: Women Matter, UCL Jurisprudence Review, (2002), 148
Dworkin A., ‘Against the Male Flood’ (1985) Harvard Women's Law Journal 8,
ibid, 10
N. Gourgey, Pornography and Freedom of Speech, Ent. Law Review, 1997
ibid, 90
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
481 U.S.C. 279. U.S. Supreme Court, 1987.
In her essay “Let’s Put Pornography Back in the Closet,” Susan Brownmiller, a prominent feminist activist, argues that pornography should not be protected under the First Amendment (59). Her position is based on the belief that pornography is degrading and abusive towards women (Brownmiller 59). She introduces the reader to the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment, and explains how it relates to her beliefs on censoring pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). In addition, she provides examples of First Amendment controversies such as Miller v. California and James Joyce’s Ulysses to explain how the law created a system to define pornographic material (Brownmiller 58). She described the system that used a three-part test as confusing (Brownmiller 58). Regardless of whether or not the First Amendment was intended to protect obscenities, she and many others believe that the legislatures should have the final say in the decision of creating and publishing pornography (Brownmiller 60).
There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace (Downs 7).
Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”. Although this amendment gave people the right express thier opinions, it still rests in one’s own hands as how far they will go to exercise that right of freedom of speech.
Susan Jacoby, in her essay entitled “A First Amendment Junkie,” attacks those who believe that the first amendment should not be cause for the continuation of public obscenity. Jacoby, adamant defender of the first amendment, questions those who wish for the freedom of expression to be denied in the case of pornography, yet seem complacent about the racism and sexism that comes from freedom of speech as well. Additionally, Jacoby argues that it is too difficult to distinguish pornography from beauty and art from obscenity. One person may see David as a wonder to behold, and yet another may look at it as degrading towards men. Jacoby believes that rather than censorship-supporters controlling what their family watches, they want the government
In conclusion, pornography is the perfect example of an unpopular form of speech. It is despised by many, but is nonetheless a necessary part of our society. Without the protection of unpopular speech, we cannot move forward as a society that fosters new ideas. If we do not protect the voice of the unpopular, then we cannot call ourselves free.
14 Baird, Robert M. and Stuart E Rosenbaum. Pornography - Private Right or Public Menace. Pg. 51
Freedom of speech is the right of civilians to openly express their opinions without constant interference by the government. For the last few years, the limitations and regulations on freedom of speech have constantly increased. This right is limited by use of expression to provoke violence or illegal activities, libel and slander, obscene material, and proper setting. These limitations may appear to be justified, however who decides what is obscene and inappropriate or when it is the wrong time or place? To have so many limits and regulations on freedom of speech is somewhat unnecessary. It is understood that some things are not meant to be said in public due to terrorist attacks and other violent acts against our government, but everything should not be seen as a threat. Some people prefer to express themselves angrily or profanely, and as long as it causes no har...
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.
Neily, C. (2008). District of Columbia v. Heller: The Second Amendment Is Back, Baby. Cato Supreme Court Review, 127-159
In this paper, I will attempt to review the debate on pornography in Chapter 4 - State and Society - of Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, Seventh Edition by John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger.
Freedom of speech cannot be considered an absolute freedom, and even society and the legal system recognize the boundaries or general situations where the speech should not be protected. Along with rights comes civil responsib...
In recent years, pornography has established itself as perhaps the most controversial topic arising out of the use of the Internet. The easy availability of this type of sexually explicit material has caused a panic among government officials, family groups, religious groups and law enforcement bodies and this panic has been perpetuated in the media.
To some, pornography is nothing more than a few pictures of scantily clad Women in seductive poses. But pornography has become much more than just Photographs of nude women. Computer technology is providing child molesters and child pornographers with powerful new tools for victimizing children. Pornography as "the sexually explicit depiction of persons, in words or images, Sexual arousal on the part of the consumer of such materials. No one can prove those films with graphic sex or violence has a harmful effect on viewers. But there seems to be little doubt that films do have some effect on society and that all of us live with such effects.