vernment. In other words, the issue has not disappeared either from legislative or popular-culture discourse. As Irving puts it: "what is important for us to recognize, even if this lame bill is amended out of existence or flat-out defeated, is that new antipornography legislation will be proposed."
Irving points out that two presidential commissions--notably commissions formed during Republican administrations--have failed to establish any evidence that pornography causes deviant sexual acts. But the core of his argument goes to how the logic of an argument in favor of censorship of pornography ought to be structured. He makes two points in particular: first, that "it's morally reprehensible to shift the responsibility for any sexual crime onto a third party--namely, away from the actual perpetrator"; and second, that the bill is "counter to the spirit of the First Amendment . . . a piece of back-door censorship." In essence, therefore, Irving is arguing that pornography should be protected under free speech laws. To amplify his argument, Irving notes that
...