Free Speech and Obscenity

[Kanamori]

Obscenity: something that is offensive to the accepted morals and decency of a society.

What do you guys think? Personally, I am of the mind that obscenity should be unprotected, as it has always been in my country.

[lancelot]

hmmm, tough one

Id broadly agree with your definition although there is a lot of wiggle room in there.

Personally, I dont think there should be any specific protection of obscene speech, but also think to there are much more important things to regulate first.

[BDC]

Well yes and no. I'm sure there are people in Britain who find it offensive and moral-less to go out drinking or to have pre-marital sex.

I however have no issue with either. :)

[yesdachi]

Just out of respect, you should not say obscene words or do obscene things in front of others that may not want to see or hear them, especially children (weather they want to, or not ).

Should it be against the law to use them in public… I don’t know.

Using an obscenity out of anger could be just like throwing a punch and elicit a “punch” in response. Accidentally saying one while slipping in a puddle in front of a playground full of kids is still using one but not with malice, does that make it different? Don’t know.

[Don Corleone]

I don't know that I agree with your defintion at all. It's a good start, but it needs refinement. By your defintion, at the time it was ongoing, the civil rights movement was obscene, because it offended the morals of white southern society.

How about adding 'with no redeeming social value' to the end of your definition? Then I'd be happier.

Are you warming up to point out that Alberto Gonzalez is following in Edwin Meese's footsteps and starting up the 'porn police' at the FBI again?

[King Henry V]

Anything that limits the freedom of anyone in any way is contrary to the direction our constitution should be going. Let them say what they please. If you don't like it, cover your ears.

Another demonstration of today's selfishness.

[The Stranger]

Well yes and no. I'm sure there are people in Britain who find it offensive and moral-less to go out drinking or to have pre-marital sex.

I however have no issue with either. :)

i agree...the tough thing is...what is the border...

[BDC]

i agree...the tough thing is...what is the border...

Well people definately shouldn't be allowed to completely ruin city centres on every Friday and Saturday. Same for regularly staggering about residential streets singing at 3am. On the other hand banning alcohol completely because some people think it's the spawn of satan is going too far.

[Divinus Arma]

Obscenity: something that is offensive to the accepted morals and decency of a society.

What do you guys think? Personally, I am of the mind that obscenity should be unprotected, as it has always been in my country.

I agree well enough with your definition.

All speech is, and should be, protected. Obscentiy should be protected. What is obscenity to one os lifestryle to another.

I think thge basic understanding is this:

"I have the right to swing my fist, so long as it does not strike you".

[Don Corleone]

Well, this is going to turn into an argument on semantics here shortly. I would argue that while pornography is not obscene, flying the Nazi flag is, based on Kanamori's defintion. Flying the Nazi flag is offensive to the accepted morals of our society. Sure, people should have the right to fly it, but that doesn't mean it's not offensive.

This whole discussion reminds me of a joke I heard one time.... The difference between kinky and perverse. Kinky is when you tickle your lover with a feather. Perverse is when you use the whole chicken.

[Kanamori]

All speech is, and should be, protected.

All political expression certainly is, but obscenity has never been considered as protected.

Well, this is going to turn into an argument on semantics here shortly. I would argue that while pornography is not obscene, flying the Nazi flag is, based on Kanamori's defintion. Flying the Nazi flag is offensive to the accepted morals of our society. Sure, people should have the right to fly it, but that doesn't mean it's not offensive.

Semantics matter . While flying the Nazi flag does fall in my definition, it is still not solely obscenity, but it is also political expression. Adding the requirement for redeeming value covers this, I believe. The expression of diverse political values has always been the main facet of our Freedom of Speech. Although I certainly agree; my definition may cover all of obscenity, it is too general and not refined well. Defining it more precisely is difficult and designing tests for obscenity is equally difficult.

[Don Corleone]

Semantics matter .

They absolutely do. I didn't mean to use that statement as a brush off. It's impossible to debate terms that don't hold common meaning for all parties. I simply meant that at some point, even though it looks like we're arguing, we may be agreeing and vice versa.

While flying the Nazi flag does fall in my definition, it is still not solely obscenity, but it is also political expression. Adding the requirement for redeeming value covers this, I believe. The expression of diverse political values has always been the main facet of our Freedom of Speech. Although I certainly agree; my definition may cover all of obscenity, it is too general and not refined well. Defining it more precisely is difficult and designing tests for obscenity is equally difficult.

Well said. In essensce, you've summarized the crux of the First Ammendment debate that has been ongoing since it was instituted. From the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1791 to Robert Mapplethorpe's exhibits and the NEA funding for them, it's a very thorny issue. What's obscene? Equally important, what's censorship? Is refusing to fund somebody's speech the equivalent of silencing them? Interesting thread...