Disgusting doesn’t make it “speech” by Ann Coulter, is the opinion of author that free speech is not absolute right. There is a typical example that child pornography should be restricted. However, what her journey contains and refer contents are child pornography. She believes child pornography has very high risk to endanger and threat innocent children, and she believes child pornography increase risk that cause damage for children, it is very ridiculous in her vision.
Author also considers child pornography is the same as intimidation, threat and curse, and she appreciates right to free to limit child pornography to promote safety and protect children. Third, author indicates child pornography is unethical, and it challenges the moral n line. Author also believes that threat and obscenity to children are more serious than to destruct personal privacy and rights of free speech. In other words, author considers child pornography never belongs to privacy or free speech, which is very awkward crime and threat. Child pornography makes children to face possible potential unknown violence.
It has huge negative effects on society, she indicates the government should ban it immediately without any objection. Author subjective view feels child pornography such case is really disgusting. Should a man be thrown in jail for he’s been thinking? By Leonard Pitts, Jr. the author believes the private journal of this man is belong to free speech and privacy, it should be protected. First of all, Dalton’s journal contains child pornography, but it is fictional and unreal thing, he didn’t offend specific anything and anyone at least. Whatever other people consider such thing is disgusting or not, this is just his personal thing alone.
Author believes that is a very horrible and unfair result for Dalton in the court. Dalton didn’t force others people to read his journal, Dalton enjoys fictional thing in his private period, and Dalton didn’t hurt and rape specific children. Author feels like it makes a big fuss over a minor issue. In this case, nobody gets hurt expect Dalton. Secondly, it groundlessly violates principle of free speech and personal privacy. The author believes that Dalton is innocent victim, and the authority should protect his rights. Nothing has responsibility to invade his privacy.
However, someone invaded his privacy and free speech. In addition, child pornography collectors think “The obsessive nature of the collecting and the narrative or thematic links for collections, which led to the building of social communities on the internet dedicated to extending these collections. Through these “virtual communities”, collectors are able to downgrade the content and abusive nature of the collections. It is an expression of ‘love’ for children rather than abuse” (Child pornography) for that the children involved as objects rather than people, and that their own behavior is normal.
It can also elaborate the reason that Dalton did it, and author believes put Dalton to prison that is very ridiculous. From what have been discussed in two essays, child pornography is a well-known gray area. The first essay argues that the risk and threat from child pornography, and should not protect such speech. The second one argues about privacy and free speech from this issue. The only maximum disagreement that Dalton’s private journal is protected or not by the First Amendment. First of all, issue about child pornography in the law.
According to PROTECT Act of 2003, “Laws on child pornography are very strict with the harshest penalties in the world and often censored, but fictional child nudity and erotica is protected as freedom of expression if considered art, unless it is considered obscene” (Newitz, Annalee). U. S. federal government considers real child pornography is illegal, Fictional child pornography (unless Obscene) of possession, sale, production, and distribution are allowed protected, but above situations only apply to fictional things.
Dalton’s case has conflicted with the key word “obscene” although it is fictional thing, and he shared it with a couple of people, it would be serious trouble. The first essay is stronger than second one at this point. Secondly, this issue with free speech and privacy. The free speech as one foremost and fundamental rights in United States. In liberal view, you can choose like it or not, but you don’t have to look at it either. For example, if there is a student’s speech can be ban because of its threat to other students, such case is not free speech.
In fact, it is extremely difficult to decide what speech should be protecting and what speech should be limited to protect children, However, according to fundamental principle, real liberty that is one’s freedom does not destroy the freedom of others. Unfortunately, most of people don’t deeply understand about that, they always use their moral values to kidnap freedom of others. Be that as it may, when is it suitable to limit speech? Whether the circumstance includes obscenity. It is very hard to delimit, connection with child pornography and free speech and privacy, it depend on different situations according to the principle of freedom.
In my view, this relationship between child pornography and free speech will never solve in next a couple decades. However, I believe the second essay is stronger than first one at this viewpoint. Third, as for Pros and cons about child pornography, it is extremely controversial issue. The United States Department of Justice estimates that “pornographers have recorded the abuse of more than one million children in the United States alone” (Levesque, Roger). Some experts believe child pornography treat children’s security.
On the one hand, there is a link between child pornography and child sexual abuse, which it increases the risk of child sexual abuse. The United Kingdom children’s charity has stated that “demand for child pornography on the internet has led to an increase in sex abuse cases, due to an increase in the number of children abused in the production process” (Guardian Unlimited). , some experts consider child pornography reduce the risk of offending for children, One the other hand, some people who love children can pay more attention on child ornography instead of sexual assault on real children, it also can protect children. It prevents the probability of occurrence of things a certain extent.
In addition, situation of child pornography as gun, many people indicate government should ban child pornography and control gun, but they have been existing for many decades in American society, it is really hard to extinct them during a short period when we face current situation. Both of essays don’t mention this viewpoint about status quo. Anyway, authority should judge child pornography such case by objective reality instead of subjective