On mySimon: iHome Portable Speaker System for iPod
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 17 of 18:
Next »
« Previous
Re: Oh, please...
The US constitution refers to "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press", not "freedom of expression". Besides which, I'm rather dubious of the notion that legal restrictions on commercial entertainments constitute a restriction of "freedom of expression". After all, everything that can be done for money in public can also be done for free in private. If sexually-oriented films, literature, pictures, and other entertainments, are really a legitimate art form, pursued for its own sake, it will florish even if there's no money to be made (I wonder how many nude models would work for free), but at least the rest of us won't be subjected to the advertising.

As it is, I don't see commercial pornography to be much different from prostitution, which is properly outlawed most in places. In fact, I would argue that those who engage in sexual activites in front of a paying audience (either live or on film) are just as much prostitutes as those who have sex with paying customers.

A good rule might be this:

If it's legal to do it in a public place, it should also legal to do it in publicly exhibited films, on public stages or in publicly distributed media. If it's illegal to do it in public , it should also be illegal to do it in publicly exhibited entertainments (or publicly distributed media). I should make it clear that I'm not writing about play-acting, but actual deeds. It's one thing to portray a bank robbery for the purpose of telling a story; it's quite another to distribute nude photos primarily for the entertainment value.

John L. Ries
Posted by: John L. Ries   Posted on: 03/26/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Determination of content  Martin Marvinski | 03/22/04
Easy, at least for the USA.  Patrick Jones | 03/23/04
Not quite that simple  Font | 03/23/04
What issues?  Patrick Jones | 03/23/04
Nothing complicated  Frank MacCrory | 03/23/04
The issues  Font | 03/23/04
Self selection  cornrevere | 03/23/04
puritans  bybelknap | 03/22/04
as long as...  ryusen | 03/22/04
Why?  Patrick Jones | 03/23/04
Why?  SC-man | 03/23/04
arguments from adult sites...  ryusen | 03/23/04
as i said...  ryusen | 03/23/04
Outside the country  Font | 03/24/04
You mean international corporations...  voska | 03/24/04
Oh, please...  emartin_z | 03/23/04
Re: Oh, please...  John L. Ries | 03/26/04
This might be acceptable if...  John L. Ries | 03/26/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

Meet Doc