Technology and Pornography

The debate over the value of pornographic expression has wide implications. Proponents of the arts defend pornography as a means of expression that gives rise to an alternative vision of the world, far removed from the mainstream notions of morality and sexual propriety. Feminist groups attack pornography with empirical evidence that the consumption of some sexually explicit materials leads to the degradation of women, which sometimes explodes into acts of sexual violence. Other critics assert that pornography is not a form of speech at all, but a sexual aid that does not concern the first amendment. Recently, three presidential commissions have conducted investigations on the impact of pornography on society. The Supreme Court has struggled to create meaningful distinctions

. . .
c value. Obscenity is not a static concept, and the Supreme Court approved the concept of "variable obscenity" by holding that legislation may constitutionally adjust the definition of obscenity to "social reality." Supreme Court Justice Scalia makes a distinction between what is obscene and what is pornographic. According to Scalia, with respect to governmental attempts to deal with pornography through creative means, such as zoning laws, a business that is devoted to the sale of highly explicit sexual material can be found to be engaged in the marketing of obscenity, even though each book or film it sells might, in isolation, be considered merely pornographic and not obscene. Furthermore, a merchant who concentrates upon the sale of such works is engaged in the business of obscenity, which may be entirely prohibited and therefore licensed as required in that locality. According to Scalia, Ginzburg v. United States, along with Miller establishes that the Constitution does not require a State or municipality to permit a business that intentionally specializes in, and holds itself forth to the public as specializing in, performance or portrayal of sex acts, sexual organs in a state of arousal, or live human nudity. In Gi
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Trade Commission, Telephone Telegraph, , Supreme Court, Court Appeals, Protection Act, Miller California, Communications Act, Ginsberg Court, According Scalia, law review, supreme court, law journal, section 1983, dial-a-porn services, telephone pornography, amendment rights, sexually explicit, court found, utility company, communications law journal, telephone information technology, communications act 1934, federal communications law, content-based regulations speech,
Approximate Word count = 2509
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Technology and Pornography