Explain Richards View And Arguments Regarding The Legal Restrictions And Prohibitions Of Pornography

Decent Essays
This essay will explain Richards view and arguments regarding the legal restrictions/prohibitions of pornography, explain and analyze the Miller test, and finally conclude by evaluating Richards’ arguments.

Millian liberalism would not allow the prohibition of pornography because it falls within the scope of private not public morality. The state must allow individuals the maximum ability to live within their own rights and pornography is not the law’s business when it is produced or involves consenting adults for the consumption of adults in private. Any harms that may result from pornography do not harm individuals in a way that would justify its prohibition. While there is not a clear definition of obscene, it can be understood to mean
…show more content…
The Miller test uses community standards which imposes view of the majority onto views of the minority. This violates the spirit of a liberal reading of the First Amendment because it restricts content and therefore speech. Speech and individual liberty should be protected. Content should not be prohibited, especially when it is based on community standards because they are “unsupported by reasoning of any intelligible kind” and do not rise to the “dignity of moral reasoning that justifies the deprivation of liberty.” Richards also argues that pornography should not be prohibited because it has some redeeming values such as creating ideas that individuals may like, providing a release for individuals who may not have access to sexual partners, and it can also reduce the incidence of certain …show more content…
Additionally, he would allow the state to prohibit the distribution of photographic pornography involving minors as subjects, because they could not have made a voluntary and rational choice to consent and their exploitation should not be encouraged by allowing their exploiters to benefit from what can constitute criminal activity. Additionally, Richards would allow for “reasonable regulation” of obtrusive distribution of the obscene, in order to protect the liberty of persons who would otherwise not wish to be exposed to it. Outside of these restrictions, Richards would allow for the state to apply temporary restrictions or repressed expression when necessary to protect the system of equal liberties, rather than to make these restrictions permanent by turning them into

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    While this reasoning is valid, Huemer does not address the claim that the government should protect the autonomy of its citizens. Making the empirical assumption that drugs inhibit users’ ability to control themselves, prohibitionists might argue that the government is obligated to restrict the use of drugs—or at least addictive ones—in the interest of preserving…

    • 704 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This belief, however, is disproved by evidence. If guns are made illegal to own, law-abiding citizens will then turn in their guns. However, those who wish to do harm with their guns would keep their guns illegally. Therefore, these laws not only take guns away from responsible citizens, but give those who wish to keep their guns an unfair advantage if they were to attack another person (ProCon.org). Gun control laws are ineffective and should not be in present in today’s society.…

    • 466 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Morality Of Pornography

    • 1572 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Therefore, pornography should not be censored because it would violate an individuals need that people have in order for their lives to be satisfactory. Every person has the right to self-expression and pornography is a form of sexual expression. (Sushma, 2014). Looking at pornographic material from a utilitarian view one must agree that pornography is ethical. When willing adults entertain themselves with pornography or involves themselves in the making of pornography, they are not causing harm to anyone.…

    • 1572 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This would make the legislature unconstitutional and the legislature could be modified or scrapped entirely to fit within the framework of the US Constitution. States cannot enact a statute that violates or infringes upon the first amendment rights of an entity; the entities in this case being GMI and HDTV. In this case the free speech being violated is these companies right to commercial speech which is protected under the first amendment. However, limits can be placed upon commercial free speech, but in this case the limit restricts commercial free speech too heavily and the purpose is unsupported for protecting…

    • 972 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    There are more important issues than arguing over something that has been decided by the Supreme Court and something that is even protected by the Constitution. It is true that “Any messages that burning the flag might convey easily can be communicated in other ways” (Allen). However, the Constitution does not say anything against it. People may want to change the law because they believe that burning the flag should be a crime. Changing the law would be unconstitutional since freedom of speech is under amendment one and changing the Bill of Rights on its own is not possible.…

    • 859 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Is Gun Control Good Or Bad

    • 1068 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Not only does it cause law abiding citizens to feel that their safety and rights are being infringed but it does not help prevent violent crimes. As has been mentioned, in some states the more gun-owners there were resulted in less violent crimes to occur. Despite the amount of laws that could be placed to prevent criminals from obtaining weapons there are still black markets and other illegal ways for them to get guns. Unfortunately, gun control would only be affecting those who abide by the law in obtain guns and using them. The United States should not be a place where people fear for their lives and have no way of protecting themselves.…

    • 1068 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Just because there may be an interrelationship, or correlation, between two concepts does not mean that one is necessarily going to lead to the other. Establishing strict gun laws would put unnecessary restrictions on law-abiding citizens; therefore, they should not be enacted. Stringent gun laws do not always effectively prevent crime as criminals will still have their own connections to a gun in order to commit a crime; people need to stop playing the blame game and become educated about guns and the safety regarding them. Laws are put into place to give order; not to take away a basic right, such as the right to bare arms. If the right to bare arms were to be taken away, what would be taken away next, if that doesn’t solve the “problem”?…

    • 1090 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Mill makes several assumptions regarding the ability of society to rationally understand the difference of harmful and offensive. There is a grey area when it comes to differentiating what is considered to be practising one’s freedom of speech or being offensive to those around them. Since there is no concrete definition on what can be considered to be ‘freedom of speech’, John Stuart Mill, author of On Liberty focuses on prohibiting the government from limiting freedom of speech and allowing citizens to have no limitations on their speech under the exception of harming others.…

    • 1624 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Obscenity is defined in Media Essentials: A Brief Introduction as a form of expression not protected by the first amendment. The reason for not protecting it is due to its inappropriate information. This information could harm or upset its audience in anyway and this must be avoided. However, where the line should be drawn is not always clear, how much protection does the first amendment give us? What is too much protection and can it go too far?…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It also can cover a range of subject matter. Censorship of this media might trigger a conflict between personal freedom and the public good. The central question that will be discussed is whether it is morally permissible for the government to limit or prohibit the exposure of consenting adults to pornography. Porn is legal, obscenity is not…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays