Freedom of Speech: Censorship, Propaganda, Free Speech, and More
Freedom of speech in America is established in the very first amendment to the American Constitution: "Congress shall pass no law ... abridging the freedom of speech." Free speech is often regarded by many as one of their most important rights. At the same time, there are government efforts to regulate, restrict, or even prohibit a many types of speech - often with popular support.
Virtual Child Pornography - Should Virtual Child Porn Be Banned?
The Christian Right's war on pornography and any sexuality that deviates from their standards creates a lot of collateral damage, including free speech. No one is likely to defend child pornography, but in the effort to stamp out child porn, anti-pornography activists tried to eliminate 'virtual' child pornography - images that look like they are of children, but which were created without any children being involved. Those efforts have been challenged in the courts.
The Christian Right's war on pornography and any sexuality that deviates from their standards creates a lot of collateral damage, including free speech. No one is likely to defend child pornography, but in the effort to stamp out child porn, anti-pornography activists tried to eliminate 'virtual' child pornography - images that look like they are of children, but which were created without any children being involved. Those efforts have been challenged in the courts.
Supreme Court Decisions on Free Speech and Censorship
Freedom of speech is established by the First Amendment: "Congress shall pass no law...abridging the freedom of speech." Free speech is regarded by many Americans as one of their most important rights, but, there are efforts to regulate, restrict, or prohibit many types of speech often with popular public support. These efforts are commonly motivated by religious objections to sex, blasphemy,…
Freedom of speech is established by the First Amendment: "Congress shall pass no law...abridging the freedom of speech." Free speech is regarded by many Americans as one of their most important rights, but, there are efforts to regulate, restrict, or prohibit many types of speech often with popular public support. These efforts are commonly motivated by religious objections to sex, blasphemy,…
Supreme Court Decision in Cuffley v. Mickes
Does Free Speech extend even to groups that are unpopular with the general public, including those considered hateful and unacceptable? Should all groups, whatever their political positions, be allowed to participate fully in government programs? Those questions were tested in Cuffley v. Mickes, which pitted the Ku Klux Klan against a state government that didn't want them to receive the publicity which usually accompanies participation in an Adopt-A-Highway program. The state lost.
Does Free Speech extend even to groups that are unpopular with the general public, including those considered hateful and unacceptable? Should all groups, whatever their political positions, be allowed to participate fully in government programs? Those questions were tested in Cuffley v. Mickes, which pitted the Ku Klux Klan against a state government that didn't want them to receive the publicity which usually accompanies participation in an Adopt-A-Highway program. The state lost.
FW/PBS v. City of Dallas (1990) - Supreme Court Decision
Zoning and licensing are common means used by city governments to control and even eliminate sexually oriented businesses, based upon the common religious belief that such businesses are inherently immoral and necessarily encourage moral decay. But just how far can local governments go in pursuit of this goal? Just how blatant can they be in using generally applicable laws to regulate or restrict certain types of ideas and speech which religious conservatives object to?
Zoning and licensing are common means used by city governments to control and even eliminate sexually oriented businesses, based upon the common religious belief that such businesses are inherently immoral and necessarily encourage moral decay. But just how far can local governments go in pursuit of this goal? Just how blatant can they be in using generally applicable laws to regulate or restrict certain types of ideas and speech which religious conservatives object to?
Roth v. United States (1957) - Supreme Court Decision in Roth v. United States
What is obscenity? This is an important question because, if the government can ban something "obscene," then that material falls outside the protection of the First Amendment and those who wish to distribute such material will have little, if any, recourse against censorship. Even worse, allegations of obscenity stem almost entirely from religious foundations, which means that essentially religious objections to material can remove basic constitutional protections from that material.
What is obscenity? This is an important question because, if the government can ban something "obscene," then that material falls outside the protection of the First Amendment and those who wish to distribute such material will have little, if any, recourse against censorship. Even worse, allegations of obscenity stem almost entirely from religious foundations, which means that essentially religious objections to material can remove basic constitutional protections from that material.
Pornography as Subversion - Can Porn Be Politically Subversive?
Is pornography good or bad for society? You'll find liberals on both sides of this question, and quite a few who don't regard it as necessarily good or bad. Almost all conservatives, however, do say that pornography is harmful and most attempts to censor sexually explicit material come from the politically and religiously conservative. This is arguably a violation of free speech and expression protections, but perhaps even worse it's a form of political and cultural control.
Is pornography good or bad for society? You'll find liberals on both sides of this question, and quite a few who don't regard it as necessarily good or bad. Almost all conservatives, however, do say that pornography is harmful and most attempts to censor sexually explicit material come from the politically and religiously conservative. This is arguably a violation of free speech and expression protections, but perhaps even worse it's a form of political and cultural control.
Journalistic Duty & Press Freedom in the Wake of 9/11
Do journalists have a duty to get at the truth, even it's uncomfortable and contrary to the agenda of the government, or do journalists instead have a duty to support and defend that policies of the government? Many people seem to believe the latter, arguing that America has enemies who are only helped by criticism of the government.
Do journalists have a duty to get at the truth, even it's uncomfortable and contrary to the agenda of the government, or do journalists instead have a duty to support and defend that policies of the government? Many people seem to believe the latter, arguing that America has enemies who are only helped by criticism of the government.
Islamofascists Hate Us Because We Abuse Our Freedom
Ever since the terrorist attacks of Septemer 11, 2001, Americans have been asking why "they" hate us. Why would others hate America and Americans so much that they would launch such a violent and destructive attack? Americans operate from a naive premise of ethical purity...
Ever since the terrorist attacks of Septemer 11, 2001, Americans have been asking why "they" hate us. Why would others hate America and Americans so much that they would launch such a violent and destructive attack? Americans operate from a naive premise of ethical purity...
American Military & American Propaganda
No one will be surprised to hear that the American government generally and the military in particular have engaged in deliberate propaganda efforts. Despite this, few people are aware of the extent to which such propaganda efforts exist - and the sorts of propaganda which is created. Not to put too fine a point on it, but it appears that little which the government tells us can be trusted.
No one will be surprised to hear that the American government generally and the military in particular have engaged in deliberate propaganda efforts. Despite this, few people are aware of the extent to which such propaganda efforts exist - and the sorts of propaganda which is created. Not to put too fine a point on it, but it appears that little which the government tells us can be trusted.
Reporters' Privilege: How Far Does it Go?
There is a common belief that journalists have a special "privilege" to refuse to testify as to whom has given them information. In reality, there is very little protection for reporters - certainly not as much as is commonly assumed - and perhaps that's the way it should be.
There is a common belief that journalists have a special "privilege" to refuse to testify as to whom has given them information. In reality, there is very little protection for reporters - certainly not as much as is commonly assumed - and perhaps that's the way it should be.
Integrity, Doubt, and Academic Freedom
Gerd Lüdemann is a New Testament scholar who is a member of the theological faculty at the University of Göttingen, Germany. His studies led him to ultimately reject his earlier Christian faith and deny the divinity of Jesus; as a consequence, he lost his teaching position.
Gerd Lüdemann is a New Testament scholar who is a member of the theological faculty at the University of Göttingen, Germany. His studies led him to ultimately reject his earlier Christian faith and deny the divinity of Jesus; as a consequence, he lost his teaching position.
Court Decision: Cuffley v. Mickes (1999)
Does Free Speech extend even to those groups generally considered hateful and unacceptable by the public? Should all groups, whatever their political positions, be allowed to participate fully in government programs? Those questions were tested in this case, which pitted the Ku Klux Klan against a state government that didn't want them to receive publicity.
Does Free Speech extend even to those groups generally considered hateful and unacceptable by the public? Should all groups, whatever their political positions, be allowed to participate fully in government programs? Those questions were tested in this case, which pitted the Ku Klux Klan against a state government that didn't want them to receive publicity.
Court Decision: Free Speech Coalition v. Reno (1999)
The internet is an amazing resource for information - but it is also a resource for those who prey upon children. Because of that, the government has tried to find ways to protect children, but have government efforts gone too far and resulted in restrictions to material which adults deserve to see if they want? In particular, should the government outlaw "virtual child pornography"?
The internet is an amazing resource for information - but it is also a resource for those who prey upon children. Because of that, the government has tried to find ways to protect children, but have government efforts gone too far and resulted in restrictions to material which adults deserve to see if they want? In particular, should the government outlaw "virtual child pornography"?
Court Decision: FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas (1990)
Zoning and licensing are common means used by city governments to control and even eliminate sexually oriented businesses, based upon the common assumption that such businesses are inherently immoral and necessarily attract criminal activity. But just how far can local governments go in pursuit of this goal?
Zoning and licensing are common means used by city governments to control and even eliminate sexually oriented businesses, based upon the common assumption that such businesses are inherently immoral and necessarily attract criminal activity. But just how far can local governments go in pursuit of this goal?
Court Decision: Roth v. United States (1957)
What is obscenity? What makes something obscene? Just how far can the government regulate material deemed to be obscene? Can the government ban obscenities? These are all important questions because, if the government can ban something that the government itself judges "obscene," then that material falls completely outside the protection of the First Amendment.
What is obscenity? What makes something obscene? Just how far can the government regulate material deemed to be obscene? Can the government ban obscenities? These are all important questions because, if the government can ban something that the government itself judges "obscene," then that material falls completely outside the protection of the First Amendment.