Ethics 9/30/01 Pornography The practice of censorship is a difficult responsibility that must be applied minimally to ensure our first amendment rights. Any government body that chooses to censor artwork or pornography on the basis of obscenity is ultimately striving towards suppression. Arguably, there are some things that need to be censored such as child pornography. Most people will agree that children shouldn't be abused sexually. However, adults should have absolute freedom to view pornography if they choose. Simply the thought of controlling what someone chooses to look at is appalling. It's a basic freedom to view obscene materials even if others don't agree with it. If a person finds pornography distasteful, then they have every right not to look at it. I must emphasize that it's a choice.
Realistically, there is no apparent risk of pornography being outlawed therefore I find it hypothetical to debate whether or not it should be censored.
It's a multi-billion dollar industry that is here to stay. My experience with pornography has been harmless. It's merely something to look at. I have respect for women and just because I support pornography doesn't mean I objectify women. In a sense, pornography is the celebration of sex and the human body. These are two elements that are engrained in human nature.
In the case of the Brooklyn Museum of Art displaying the art of Renee Cox, it should be left alone regardless of how Mayor Rudolph Giuliani feels about it. He is a Catholic so it only seems natural for him to be upset over a painting of an African Virgin Mary decorated with elephant dung. The artwork doesn't appear to be some kind of attack on Catholicism but rather an interpretation. Undoubtedly, it should be protected by free speech. Giuliani's attempt to cut funding for...