By DEACON MIKE MANNO, JD
This column has spent the better part of the last two years dealing with some of the most pressing problems facing not only people of faith, but of the population in general. This week I want to discuss something that I briefly touched on in my November 8 column: The scourge of pornography.
Most people believe that, while not always socially acceptable, pornography is legal and efforts to suppress it are unconstitutional. Well, that’s only partly correct. The fact is that obscenity is illegal and federal law prohibits the distribution of it through the mail, on the Internet, cable and satellite TV, retail sales, and by common carrier.
In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly held that obscenity and child pornography do not constitute constitutionally protected speech. “This court has always assumed that obscenity is not protected by the freedoms of speech and press,” said Justice William Brennan in the 1957 case of Roth v. United States.
But what is the difference between what is referred to as “soft core” pornography and obscenity? Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart commented in Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964): “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.”
Well, the Supreme Court finally set a standard. It the 1973 case of Miller v. California, a porn peddler, Marvin Miller, sent out advertisements for books and films that contained graphic photos depicting sexual acts. One of the recipients turned the material over to the police and Miller was charged and convicted of violating the California criminal obscenity statute.
In his appeal, the Supreme Court replaced the old “utterly without redeeming value” standard with a three-pronged test: Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests; whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
The Miller test faced some obstacles. For example, in 1987 the Supreme Court overruled the conviction of an Illinois pornographer holding that the first two prongs of the test were to be based on community standards, but the third was to be determined by a “reasonable person” test. That year Oregon’s Supreme Court struck down the state’s criminalization of obscenity as a violation of the state constitution.
And in 1997 the Supreme Court ruled the anti-indecency provisions of the Communications Decency Act, which had outlawed sending “obscene or indecent” materials over the Internet to minors, violated the First Amendment. The next year Congress amended the law to address the court’s concerns.
But over the past 15 or so years, prosecutions for obscenity have decreased and the federal government had nearly abandoned prosecutions. During the Obama administration, under Attorney General Eric Holder, prosecutions ended. So, what is the concern? Isn’t pornography just a harmless vice? After all, it doesn’t really hurt anybody, does it?
Well, recently while researching other matters, I’ve come across several states that are declaring pornography a public health menace. Currently at least twelve states, Montana, Utah, Virginia, Idaho, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, South Dakota, Kansas, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania, have done so, and there are at least two other states that have the matter under consideration.
Like many other public questions, such as drug and alcohol abuse, this has finally reached a point where the public is beginning to take notice, especially in an era of free sex and broken families. Scholars have now developed a body of research pointing to the proposition that pornography is harmful to the public health.
Some of the findings:
Pornography is everywhere and is available to children. Twenty-seven percent of millennials report that they first viewed pornography before puberty.
Pornography is linked to an increase in sexual violence; women who are exposed to it are likely to accept “rape myths” and are more likely to accept physical and sexual abuse from their partners, thus leading to the acceptance of violence against women.
It causes adolescents to engage in sexual activity earlier, with more partners and frequency which leads to an increase in venereal disease, teen pregnancy, and abortions.
Studies have also found a correlation between pornography and sexual harassment and rape and the portrayal of women as sex objects.
Pornography has also been linked to the increase in child molestation.
It affects the brain, creating a demand for more and more explicit porn, much the same as drug addiction creates an increasing demand.
Studies have also linked it to concepts of decreased self-worth and depression in young adults and negative body image in both boys and girls.
It is also linked to the trafficking of young girls and boys for prostitution.
And the list could go on and fill the entire page — I know, I’ve seen the list. The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCSE) has compared pornography to tobacco: “Despite tobacco’s former widespread use and acceptance in American culture, once its harms became apparent, society took action and adopted dramatic new policies to limit the harmful effects of smoking.”
The NCSE continued, “A growing body of neuroscience reveals that adults are developing addictions to pornography, as pornography hijacks the brain’s reward center in a way similar to drug addiction. Moreover, an alarming, nationally representative online survey of 3,000 people reveals that nearly half of young people (ages 13-24) actively seek out pornography weekly or more often.
“This is especially troubling given that research into how the human brain develops shows that adolescents are not as readily able to access…the portion of the brain that controls impulses and allows for rapid, smart decision making. Furthermore, adolescents are more susceptible to forming addictions than adults….Thus, it can be said that a propensity for addiction is more strongly ‘hardwired’ into the adolescent brain.”
NCSE Executive Director Dawn Hawkins said: “Modern pornography — with its limitless quantity, speed, and violent or degrading themes — is a jarring new variable in human evolution….Medical professionals, elected officials, therapists and more are beginning to acknowledge the public health harms of pornography.”
We can hope that public attention will grow and pornography will follow the path of tobacco and become anathema. Check the facts on the NCSE website and note them next time you visit with your political representatives or you have an urge to write a letter to the editor.
You can reach Mike at: DeaconMike@q.com.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress