[aconservaguy]

Is porn "speech?" Is porn protected under the first amendment? Is it unconstitutional or constitutional for a town or city or state to ban porn (and just referencing to whatever amendment i don't think is good enough for either idea)? Irrespective of twinkies or smoking or some abstract "right," can it be shown that pornography is or is not a constitutionally protected? There's been much discussion about whether or not it's right to ban it, yet discussion about the legality of a ban or a constitutional protection has been lost. Or maybe i'm not looking back far enough;)

[DoughtyOne]

Although I'd term myself a very infrequent user of soft porn, I do believe that adults should be able to dable in it if they so choose. When the subject turns to snuff films, I'm not convinced it should be available, but I've never formed a firm conviction over this.

[general_re]

Mere pornography cannot be forbidden under the 1'st and 14'th Amendments, whether by states, localities, or the federal government, but obscenity can be banned, as per Miller. The court set up a three-pronged test in Miller for determining whether material was obscene, that went like this:

The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. Wisconsin, supra, at 230, quoting Roth v. United States, supra, at 489; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

The decision has been refined over the years since then (Miller was 1973), notably in Smith v. US, 431 US 291 (1977), and Pope v. Illinois, 481 US 497 (1987), but the basic, increasingly shaky, framework of Miller remains.

[biblewonk]

Is porn "speech?" Is porn protected under the first amendment? Is it unconstitutional or constitutional for a town or city or state to ban porn (and just referencing to whatever amendment i don't think is good enough for either idea)? Irrespective of twinkies or smoking or some abstract "right," can it be shown that pornography is or is not a constitutionally protected? There's been much discussion about whether or not it's right to ban it, yet discussion about the legality of a ban or a constitutional protection has been lost. Or maybe i'm not looking back far enough;)

People sure like to hide their stash behind the constitution. Porn is prostitution IMHO which is really only illegal on paper anymore. Prostitutes are advertising on the internet and the 'police' are only policing the ones who are misrepresenting their wears. It's legality is for lawyers and Larry Flint to debate but I will keep calling it what it is.

The "is porn speech" question is certainly a classic question. How about "Is expression speech".