The Definition Of Obscenity And Obscenity Laws Constructed...

Obscenity revolves around what constitutes pornography and sexually explicit material to be protected by the First Amendment rights of freedom of speech and press as stated in the Constitution. I want to look at the language and definitions of obscenity created by the Supreme Court and interrupt their effects on society. In this essay, I want to argue that the creation of the definition of obscenity and obscenity laws constructed from community standards can be harmful to society because they can be interrupted in many different ways. First, I would like to define terms of what obscenity means and the differences between obscenity, vulgarity, and profanity. Obscenity, as defined by the Supreme Court case of Miller v. California, believed†¦show more content†¦In a legal context, obscenity describes expressions that are typically sexual or crude references to the body or bodily functions that offend the sexual morality of a given time and place. Even though, this creates a gra y are between something considered profane or vulgar language and/or behavior and obscenity because profanity and vulgarity can offend the sexual morality as well. Nonetheless, the First Amendment of the Constitution does not protect behavior, actions, or language seen specifically as obscene. Next, I would like to explore at what point or context does something turn from being considered profane and/or vulgar into being considered obscene and therefore, against the law. In Roth v. US, the court held that obscenity was not â€Å"within the area of constitutionally protected speech or press†. The Supreme Court made it clear in the ruling that the First Amendment did not protect every behavior, action, or expression, such as materials that were â€Å"utterly without redeeming social importance†. The Supreme Court believed the definition of obscenity as stated in the above paragraph gave a fair warning to the public and satisfied the demands of the Due Process clause in the Fourteenth Amendment. The Supreme Court wanted to ensure to the public that an individual couldn’t be deprived of â€Å"life, liberty and property without