Can someone explain how pornography is freedom of speech?

[molly bloom]

Pornography is simply erotica with brighter lights.

As such, erotica has been with us since humankind first sexualized itself- go back to Pompeii, to the temple friezes at Khajuraho, and see explicit depictions of people engaged in various acts of sexual intercourse.

The 'problem' with pornography is not so much pornography in and of itself, but Judaeo-Christian and Islamic attitudes towards the body and sex and the depiction of the body and sex acts.

The freedom to recount tales of sexual acts, and to describe in images sexual fantasies is part and parcel of the freedom to express oneself- and frankly I find the depiction of ultra violence, glamourized and sanitised, to be a much more destructive use of the freedom of speech.

[Ned]

I think porn is offensive to most women, particularly married women and would be shocking and unsettling to most children. It is also unsettling to certain religions, including communism. The former teach purity as virtue and impurity as sin.

However, porn is not offensive to most men because men are "visual" sexual creatures.

What does this have to do with "free speech?" Well, porn clearly is a form of expression. One can, I hope, distinguish between really well done porn and garbage just as one can distinguish between beautiful women and, well, .... But it does offends some and can be harmful to children.

So what we do in the US is regulate it. We keep it out of the public and out of the way of children. Those who want access to it, may.

This seems to be a well balance compromise to a complicated issue.

[Ben Kenobi]

The 'problem' with pornography is not so much pornography in and of itself, but Judaeo-Christian and Islamic attitudes towards the body and sex and the depiction of the body and sex acts.

Molly Bloom:

How do Christians depict the body, and sex?

Are both inherently evil?

[GePap]

Why wouldn't pornography be considered free speech? What, allowing blatantly racist, anti-semitic and mysoginistic tracts, articles calling for all sorts of represssion: thoese are allowed, but pictures of people being naked, or having sex, Oh no, the world will end!

[The Andy-Man]

if you don't like it don't watch it!

[muxec]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
if you don't like it don't watch it!

An extremely good advice. I can let you URLs of some free pornosites if you want.

[St Leo]

I think porn is offensive to most women, particularly married women

Particularly opressed and unempowered ones.

and would be shocking and unsettling to most children.

Have studies been done?

It is also unsettling to certain religions, including communism.

Death to religions. Commies are nuts, though it's always good to have a counterbalance to neocons.

[Lincoln]

There is no "free speech" right to saturate the citizens of this country with pornography. Free speech is to give the people the right (or rather to recognize the "natural" right) to criticize the government. Look at the early laws that remained in place after the Bill of Rights was passed. There were all kinds of restrictions on pornography. The "right" has been stretched so that the founders would not recognize it.

[GePap]

Ayt the same time, right fatre the onstitution was writen, there were laws that made human beings property. rights do change over time, and this ia a good thing overall.

We already have many laws against showing sex and nudity in public. You know, i find it realy funny: when the idea is that , you know, people might not want to listen to individual who don't suppor the war, then the consumer knows best and its all about bisiness. To say that the average American consumer wants to watch a bunch of half-naked people on screen..oh, then its the ungodly liberal media pushing this upon unexpecting saintly Americans.

[Lincoln]

What exactly are you trying to say GePap? You need to edit your post.

[GePap]

Why? read all the threads people make when they say noycotting anti-war artists is a violation of free speech. we always hear the response that hey, the media is rpivate, they do what they need to do to get business, and hence it has nothing to do with free speech. Well, then the fact that half-naked people appear on tv all the time (lead by the moralists at Fox), then obviosuly that is what the American people want, to see half naked people.

[Berzerker]

Many people have problems with pornography, it can be very addictive.

Many people have problems with sugar, it can be very addictive.

[Lincoln]

Well I have no argument with the fact that many people want it. But I thought this thread was to discuss the first amendment as it pertains to pornograpy.

[KrazyHorse]

How do you distinguish artistic or political visual pieces from pornographic ones?

The government has no business regulating what's acceptable free speech and what's not, unless there are other issues at hand (libel, incitement, chld pornography)

[Berzerker]

Well, then the fact that half-naked people appear on tv all the time (lead by the moralists at Fox), then obviosuly that is what the American people want, to see half naked people.

Yeah, isn't it funny how people like Bill O'Reilly decry the lack of our morality and only mentions Fox and their tawdry programming when someone points out the hypocrisy of him working for Fox. Then he tells us about Jenna Jameson et al hurting children while he shows Jenna in "lewd" poses on his show so, in his words, his viewers will understand the subject matter - porn.