In today’s fast developing and modern society the thought of seeing two grown adults having sex is still considered taboo. Most Americans cringe at the thought of seeing pornography and dismiss the act as nothing more than a senseless lewd act. Yet, the Supreme Court held that pornography was to be considered a form of personal expression and should be protected under the first amendment (New York v. Ferber, 1973). The Supreme Court did not choose to extend the same constitutional protection to child pornography, arguing against its explicit and hurtful content. Supreme Court Justices argued that child pornography has no scientific, literary, artistic, or political value; they thought the material that was going to arise from child pornography was going to cause more harm than good if they were to allow it to be protected.
Some argue that banning pornography is an infringement on the right to freedom of speech. But violent pornography denies women their freedom of speech, movement and safety. This papers just shows you some examples of how violent pornography has the potential to plague society. The true goal is to promote positive images of all people. In conclusion, excessive violence in any form is not a helpful tool to a society that is trying to prosper.
Pornography addiction is as real as any other addiction. So why is it hard for some to realize that pornography is a growing problem and not an answer to ones need for sexual fulfillment? In an article written by George Collins, a recovering sex addict, he states, “Many thousands of people, mostly men, are investigated, reprimanded, and fired for downloading porn” (Collins, 2012). Pornography has traveled from causing problems in ones home to ones place of work; since the need for ones sexual high outweighs more important factors in their lives. So many have bought into the lie that pornography is not addictive, for there are no harmful chemicals entering the body.
But, is pornography really that harmful? There are many reasons why the government is having trouble putting restrictions on pornography. As Cynthia Stark states in Social Theory and Practice," just because some find certain materials offensive is not a sufficient reason for restricting those materials." There has to be proper grounds for making such laws to prevent pornography distribution because either way you look at it, it goes against the free speech laws of the first amendment. Nadine Strossen of the ACLU had a good point when she said "the First Amendment contains no exception for sexual speech.
There is a shortage of human organs used for transplants that spans across the world. Most people may think that the shortage on effects foreign countries, but it is also a huge issue here in the United States. This shortage is caused by the lack of individuals that are actually donating their organs and also because the government officials have made it illegal to sale and purchase human organ. The selling of human organs is considered to be illegal in every country except Iran, and Iranians have solved their organ shortage by legalizing sales. ( Black, 1986) Even though the selling of organs are extremely illegal and by doing so this violates the 1984 U.S. law that banned the sales of human organs.
It’s a multi billion dollar industry, it easily accessible by adults and adolescents, its addiction rate is very high. Its not video games or cigarettes it’s Pornography. Pornography is tearing the fabric of society in half and the demand for it is higher than ever. Some people think pornography is just the simple viewing of scantily clad women but it is more than that. The psychological and mental state it puts people in is the worst.
The key premise here is that the mass media does not cause undesirable social behaviour and in actuality, the media people should not be dubbed as the "bad guys". They simply use their power in the most constructive ways possible in order to promote their ratings and popularity. One way to do that is to concentrate on what sells: sex, violence and disaster. Having said this, why is it then, that many in society still believe otherwise; why do they continue to believe that pornography is " evil" and is a major cause for violence against women, specifically rape? There are many reasons for this misinterpretation and through the following few points, an attempt will be made to show that pornography has very little to almost no correlation with violence against women (of course nothing is "absolute" in society).
This implies that the white males are the most notorious in child pornography. It is also evident that the vice happens in also most parts of the country and across the divide in terms of social, academic, and economic backgrounds. This is evident from the finding that the offenders were of different educational, geographi... ... middle of paper ... ... United States is a real problem in real time because it is targeting the most innocent members of the society. There are more efforts directed at fighting the vice by law enforcement agencies, which are at high alert on child pornography. The risk posed by the offenders is exceptionally high given the fact that they have higher chances of succeeding by targeting children.
The Communications Decency Act is unconstitutional by banning speech that is protected by the First Amendment in a medium in which the user is giving the ability to select what he or she does or does not want to receive. The government gives citizens the privilege of using the internet, but it has never given them the right to use it. If we have a "Constitution" and, supposedly, a "First Amendment"- why is the Government using legislation to stop us from expressing ourselves? We seem to be a ironic and paradox country. We didn’t want to be the first to use nuclear weapons and the atomic bomb, but were the first and, so far to present day, the last to use them.
In today’s society, people are debating if “virtual” child pornography should be banned. Most people believe that it should, while others believe that it should not be banned at all. Since the Supreme Court decided that “virtual” child pornography is legal, most people have felt that they have made a horrible mistake. By check many articles on this topic, I have decided to use two fairly good articles, written by two well-known editors, Wendy Kaminer, editor at The Atlantic Monthly, and Paul Rodriguez, editor of Insight on the News. Even though I agree that “virtual” child pornography should be banned, Kaminer presented a stronger argument that “virtual” child pornography should not be banned.