Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Negative implications of internet pornography in 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).
within the protection of the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment and the Due
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.
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.
Is it moral that we let our government decide what we hear or say? We as God believing, naturally good, human beings should know the difference between what is good, and what is bad. I believe that's the greatest immoral act of all. Bibliography:.. TAKING CONTROL Adam Veness Essay College Prep English Bolton A 3 Americans hate the word censorship.
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
The First Amendment guarantees that congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. U.S. CONST. amend. I. The courts have heeded the First Amendment’s underlying values in order to determine whether or not recording police officers is a freedom of the press and have answered in the affirmative; they have firmly established that the First Amendment extends further and encompasses a range of conduct related to receiving information and ideas. Glik v. Cunniffe, 655 F.3d 78, 82 (1st Cir. 2011). The Supreme Court has observed that the First Amendment protects the right to gather news from any source by means within the law. See id.at 82.
According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).
The first Amendment states “Congress shall make no law… prohibiting… the right of the people peacefully to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances”
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.
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.
Is Censorship Justified? Ever wondered the reason behind racial discrimination, sexual discrimination, children committing crimes or violence? The main reason is that censorship is not properly imposed or there is a need for censorship in the society. Censorship is the suppression of ideas and information that certain people, individuals, groups or government officials find objectionable, offensive or dangerous to others. There are varieties of other definitions, but all have in common the concept of withholding information and/or resources from those who seek it.
Censorship affects our society in many different ways, it affects the music we listen to, the movies we watch, the books we read, and many other aspects of our everyday lives. Even though many might argue that censorship doesn't really have a place in a society that emphases freedom of speech and the freedom to express oneself, but censorship is an essential and needed part of our growing society, it's needed in the television industry, the Internet, and the music industry. Censorship helps to make our world a better place because it creates a better environment for us to live in.