Dangers Of Child Pornography

Disgusting doesn't make it "speech" by Ann Coulter, is the opinion of author that free speech is not absolute right. There is a typical example that child pornography should be restricted. However, what her journey contains and refer contents are child pornography. She believes child pornography has very high risk to endanger and threat innocent children, and she believes child pornography increase risk that cause damage for children, it is very ridiculous in her vision. Author also considers child pornography is the same as intimidation, threat and curse, and she appreciates right to free to limit child pornography to promote safety and protect children. Third, author indicates child pornography is unethical, and it challenges the moral bottom
The first essay argues that the risk and threat from child pornography, and should not protect such speech. The second one argues about privacy and free speech from this issue. The only maximum disagreement that Dalton's private journal is protected or not by the First Amendment. First of all, issue about child pornography in the law. According to PROTECT Act of 2003, “Laws on child pornography are very strict with the harshest penalties in the world and often censored, but fictional child nudity and erotica is protected as freedom of expression if considered art, unless it is considered obscene” (Newitz, Annalee). U.S. federal government considers real child pornography is illegal, Fictional child pornography (unless Obscene) of possession, sale, production, and distribution are allowed protected, but above situations only apply to fictional things. Dalton’s case has conflicted with the key word “obscene” although it is fictional thing, and he shared it with a couple of people, it would be serious trouble. The first essay is stronger than second one at this point. Secondly, this issue with free speech and privacy. The free speech as one foremost and fundamental rights in United States. In liberal view, you can choose like it or not, but you don’t have to look at it either. For example, if there is a student’s speech can be ban because of its threat to other students, such case is not free speech. In fact, it is extremely difficult to decide what speech should be protecting and what speech should be limited to protect children. However, according to fundamental principle, real liberty that is one's freedom does not destroy the freedom of others. Unfortunately, most of people don’t deeply understand about that, they always use their moral values to kidnap freedom of others. Be that as it may, when is it suitable to limit speech? Whether the circumstance includes obscenity. It