Freedom of Expression and Communication Ethics

Dr. Lee McGaan  

  Office:  WH 308  (ph. 309-457-2155);  email lee@monmouthcollege.edu
  Home:  418 North Sunny Lane (ph. 309-734-5431, cell 309-333-5447)

Fall 2016 Office Hours:   MWF:  9:30 - 10am, 11am - Noon & 1 -2pm TTh:  2-3pm & by apt.  |  copyright (c) by Lee McGaan, 2006-2016


Heresy/Blasphemy

A.     Overview of Issues Related to Heresy/Blasphemy-- see chart in text p. 120 –

Types of Heresy

1.                  False doctrine

2.                  Irreverence

3.                  Profane and disgusting

4.                  Sensual and erotic

5.                  Opinions and facts of science

6.                  Dissenting views on private morality

B.                 Blasphemy(1, 2) -- not an issue in US law since Burstyn v Wilson 1952

1.                  blasphemy cannot be prosecuted under US constitution

2.                  film is protected under 1st Amendment

C.                Heresy - not a real issue since Epperson v Arkansas 1968 (Darwinism prohibited) stopped censorship of ideas on religious grounds

D.                Immoral ideas (usually sex) cannot be censored:  Kingsley international Pictures v Regents (NY) 1959 (5, 6)         [ Lady Chatterley=s Lover ]

 

II.                   Obscenity

A.                 Rosen v US 1897 established the "Hicklin Rule" in America

1.                  tendency to corrupt those whose minds are open to such corruption

2.                  all work must be at child level?

3.                  isolated passages may be judged

4.                  This standard was eroded over time before Roth

B.                 Miller v Cal. 1973  The current major case on obscenity (explicit sexual illustrations in ads).  New Test of Obscenity

1.                  average person applying contemporary community standards finds the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.

2.                  the work depicts or describes in a patently offensive way sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law (or which a judge/jury believes was intended by the law)

3.                  the work, taken as a whole, (by a reasonable person) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (SLAPS test)

 

Dissents in recent cases

a.                  It is impossible to solve the vagueness problem

b.                  A lack of "fair notice," therefore, follows.  That causes:

(1)              a chilling effect on expression, even legal expression, and

(2)         institutional stress on the government

 

c.                  There was no 18th Century exception to free speech for obscenity

d.                  Brennan proposes consenting adult rule – all is  protected for C.A.

 

C.                Other Obscenity Issues

1.                  NEA obscenity rules -- are on and off amd not very enforceable but the government can use a “decency” standard for government funding (and broadcasting)

2.                  Child pornography

a.                  rules can be more strict than regular obscenity law (NY v Ferber, 1982), and

b.                  there is no right to private possession (Osbourne v Ohio 1990). 

c.                  Child Pornography Prevention Act finds altered or digital photos appearing to be children not child porn (Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition, 2002)

3.                  Porn as offensive against women's civil rights,  Indy case 1984 raise efficacy question again and was found unconstitutional

4.                  Using zoning laws to restrict porn shops is OK if not overbroad and not licensing

5.                  RICCO laws - asset seizure,  no seizure until after an advocacy hearing but seizure can occur after (Alexander v US, 1993)

6.                  Nude dancing can be restricted

 

 last updated 2/21/2012