833
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Debate: To what extent should we have obscenity laws (view source)
Revision as of 06:22, May 27, 2008
, 06:22, May 27, 2008a start
As everyone knows, there has always been a long legal battle over the obscenity laws. Many artists, musicians, authors etc. have run afoul of them throughout the ages. The defense of it has usually been centered around the [[First Amendment]]. However, the [[Supreme Court]] has ruled that obscene speech is not covered by the first amendment. While the basic ruling has not been overturned, the SC (during the Warren era) greatly loosened the term of what is obscene.
The way I see it, there is danger on both sides of the coin. To say "this is bad", or the FCC saying you can't say these 7 words on Television seems to infringe on free speech. On the other hand, when broadcasted or published in the public arena, we run a risk of exposing children to inappropriate material. I'm sure we all agree that we don't want to return to the time of [[Anthony Comstock]], but should there be a limit?
So here's my question: To what extent should there be '''legal''' "limits" on obscenity? I open the floor to all opinions. '''---[[user:DLerner]]---''' 02:22, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
The way I see it, there is danger on both sides of the coin. To say "this is bad", or the FCC saying you can't say these 7 words on Television seems to infringe on free speech. On the other hand, when broadcasted or published in the public arena, we run a risk of exposing children to inappropriate material. I'm sure we all agree that we don't want to return to the time of [[Anthony Comstock]], but should there be a limit?
So here's my question: To what extent should there be '''legal''' "limits" on obscenity? I open the floor to all opinions. '''---[[user:DLerner]]---''' 02:22, 27 May 2008 (EDT)