DOES THE CONSTITUTION REALLY DICTATE MANKIND'S FOUNDATION TO LAW AND ORDER FOR THE NEW GENERATIONS?
Written by Michelle Botello
In the US we rely on the Constitution and it is in this doctrine where we find laws that apply to our lives today. The tools for protecting freedom of expression, the First Amendment with Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, play a huge role in our media experience and protect websites from lawsuits.
The purpose of the CDA as Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 is to prevent minors from gaining access to sexually explicit materials on the internet. The primary purpose of this legislation was to restrict free speech on the internet. Since the CDA, and with the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)’s help, which was tossed by the judge, the CDA 230 remains.
The EFF is an international non-profit digital rights group of about 79 employees based in San Francisco, with its purpose to address digital rights, internet activism, lobbying, and litigation, promote Internet civil liberties and have been around since 1990.
SIDE EFX - EXPLORATON HABITS
Since the pandemic, isolation, loneliness and stress can contribute to the consumption of pornography habits, according to IJIR, Your Sexual Medicine Journal. A study took place exploring patterns of pornography and coronavirus-themed pornography during the outbreak.
The nations with “stay at home orders”, (China, Italy, Spain, and France), using “Porn Hub” and “Porn” showed the highest increase of interest worldwide with an Average Weekend Percentage Change of 4.9 and 3.8. The USA and Sweden did not show a similar increase.
The worldwide increase ranges between 18.5 and 61.8 after the beginning of self-quarantine. The men's percentage rate was 46-74 and women rated 16-41 percent. Significant enough, most of this activity is protected by the Constitution.
We also have internet rights which include our right to internet access and freedom of information. Digital rights are those human rights and legal rights that allow individuals to access, use, create, and publish digital media or to access and use computers, other electronic devices and telecommunications networks.
The concept is particularly related to the protection and realization of existing rights, such as the right to privacy and freedom of expression, in the context of digital technologies, especially the internet. The laws of several countries recognize a right to internet access.
The first ordered obscenity was in 1815 of “a man in an obscene, impudent, and indecent posture with a woman”. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled it “lascivious” that could corrupt the morals of young people by “inflaming their passions” and it fell under criminal prosecution.
BLAST FROM THE LEGAL PAST
In the 19th century anti-obscenity societies began to wane, and social mores courts began to embrace protective obscene speech laws. “Obscenity” was yet to be defined and it took decades and struggles to give a clear meaning to the word. In early times, obscenity was not protected by the First Amendment.
It also was not included in ‘freedom of speech’ nor ‘freedom of the press’. In the First Amendment it states that speech cannot constitutionally be censored merely because it might have harmful consequences.
In 1957, the Court stated that the First Amendment permits the government to censor sexual expression only if the material judged as a whole, appeals primarily to the prurient interest in sex, is patently offensive to contemporary community standards, and lacks any redeeming social value. This led to an upsurge of sexual expression, magazines, books, and movies.
In today’s world we find “obscenity” in websites with access to videos and the law has been simply overwhelmed, according to americanbar.org. It’s no longer an aim to ban it, but how to deal with it.
The Constitution denies government authority to choose what the American people say, idealize, value, fact and opinion, imagine, and will be allowed to express or consider or hear or view.
According to the article, this gives the individuals more exposure about sex and its varied possibilities.
A broader freedom of sexual expression, but, according to the article, continued exposure to sexual imagery can cause compulsive and obsessive behaviors that resemble behavioral addiction.
Courts have cleared Executive Mark Zuckenberg and his company, Facebook, of any legal responsibility for violent attacks spawned by Facebook accounts tied to Hamas. It is not illegal for FB posts to foment attacks on refugees in Europe or try to end democracy as we know it in America, according to protocol.com.
Section 230 actually protects social media companies from taking the responsibility for their platforms and the horrors. If this continues, Facebook may become an even more dangerous place for young people, said protocol.com.
www.google.com: Section 230: everything you need to know about Section 230
www.eff.org: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
https://www-the-verge-com: Everything you need to know about Section 230
www.nature.com: The Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on pornography…
www.americanbar.org: Sexual Expression and Free Speech: How Our Values Have (D)evolved
Protocol.com: Why Section 230 hurts kids, and what to do about i