The Law and Pornography

Paper Summary:

This essay expresses the opposing views of Catherine MacKinnon and Ronal Dworkin regarding the issue of legal regulation of pornography. It states both of the views with quotes from their analysis of cases of American Booksellers v Hudnut, as well as R v Butler. The essay ends with a personal view on the subject matter, with regard to both of the authors' views and finds that although neither presents the full picture, Dworkin's argument focuses more on the legality of the issue as opposed to feminism of MacKinnon.

From the Paper:

"Free speech and what it really means has taken different forms for different individuals. And while historically, it has served as a safeguard against hateful and harmful ideas entering a wider social realm, it also leaves enough room for misuse. Is speech to be, to an extent, regulated (as it is in the British Race Relations Act) or is to be equally allowed to any opposing view, no matter how potentially dangerous or degrading it is? Does pornography qualify as a speech and if so, how is it best regulated without stifling the First Amendment? In her 1993 book "Only Words", Catharine MacKinnon gives several arguments regarding pornography."

More papers on The Law and Pornography :

• Analytical Essay # 123393 : "Business Law and Internet Pornography"
• Analytical Essay # 47542 : "The Issue of Pornography in Society"
• Term Paper # 9714 : "Politics and Pornography"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: