Ultimately, she believed that censorship of any kind against pornography was wrong.
Both of these essays are clearly focusing on pornography. The writers try to explain what pornography is, if there is any definite meaning, then go ahead and try to state their case of why it should or should not be allowed to be produced and sold freely.
Both writers seem to feel the same way about pornography, though they do not express it in the exact same ways. They both seem to appreciate the fact that pornography should not be sold in public places.
In Susan's article, she appreciates that most women support the first amendment but are not ready to accept abortion articles and, books and magazines be exposed to the public eye.
Though she seems to have mixed feelings, still thinks that Brown's articleshe is quite clear that pornography should be kept out of the public's eye if not completely forgotten by the human species. In Susan's article, she has tried to give the two sides of two parties that were having different feelings towards pornography.
The article states that there should be freedom and that it is simply a free world. However, she does not agree that this issue greatly affects the women more than it affects the men or children Moon In her article pornography or sex should not be put at the same level as violence.
To some extent, pornography can only be described depending on who has been posed the question. What might be rude, disgusting and absurd to one person, might be an expression of beauty, one's confidence and a form of expression to another.
In the article, she has tried to explain that our behavior or misbehavior should not be blamed on pornography.
To her kid pornography is not an issue of the first amendment but rather an issue of child abuse. Rape, homosexuality and other actions that are considered as evils should not be blamed on pornography but rather one's level of control.
Parents taking children to see some of these movies e.
Goodbaras she saw some parents do when she came out from watching, should not be blamed on pornography as the feminists would like to put it but should be blamed on the parents.
Parents should be in control of their television sets and should switch the sets off if they feel what their children are watching is not good. They should expect the Federal Communications Commission to play their parts for them. Miller's article focuses on the negative side of pornography and insists that it should be done away with and completely forgotten.
To him, the freedom of speech and expression should not be equated to the production and viewing of obscene and absurd staff. This brought out by how he agrees with Chief Justice Warren Burger's comment.
One of the reasons he feels that these kinds of materials should not be burned is because the suggestion would only reach deaf ears Magee To him in the past, one used to know pornography when they saw it but as time goes by; it has become hard to know the difference due to the definitions and "cover ups" it has been given.
It has now become up to one's responsibility to control them and visit a paper stand knowing that they are going to buy a newspaper and not some obscene magazines. The writers have tried to show us clearly how they feel about the first amendment and pornography. Susan has tried her best not to lean on one side although, at the end of the article, she clearly shows where and what she is more comfortable with.
She has shown us that how people react and how they behave should not be blamed on pornography. Everyone should be allowed to express themselves and people should take responsibility where they are supposed to. She has given us her own personal examples in order to emphasize on points which help the reader understand the article more.
This has been seen when she tells us that she saw children line up with their parents to go watch a movie that was not so child-friendly. This was irritating because the same parents were would later complain that what was being aired was pornographic and not good for the children.
She has also made me be stronger with my belief for I feel that there should be freedom of expression.Attention grabbers for research essays on capital punishment term paper and research paper early decision cornell ilr essay a first amendment junkie essay voy a dormir storni analysis essay dissertation refugees welcome essay on cultural homogenization meaning spatial organization essays trinitromethane synthesis essay essays on adolescence.
Argument Mini essay. College essay writing service Question description Please choose one of the following essays in your textbook: (1) “Military Women in Combat: Why Making It Official Matters?” by Jena McGregor (28), (2) “A First Amendment Junkie” by Susan Jacoby (48), (3) “Executions Should Be Televised” by Shemtob and Lat (53), (4) “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should be.
The first amendment is perhaps the most important part of the U.S. Constitution because the amendment guarantees citizens freedom of religion, speech, writing and publishing, peaceful assembly, and the freedom to raise grievances with the Government.
Susan Jacoby, A First Amendment Junkie CHECKLIST FOR GETTING STARTED Examining the Author's Thesis Examining the Author's Purpose Examining the Author's Methods Examining the Author's Personal Summary Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to Argument. Critical reading: getting started -- Active reading -- Previewing -- Skimming: finding the thesis -- Reading with a pencil: underlining, highlighting, annotating -- "This ; Therefore, that" -- First, second, and third thoughts -- Summarizing and paraphrasing -- Susan Jacoby, A First Amendment junkie -- A checklist for getting started -- A.
Susan Jacoby, author of "The First Amendment Junkie," is s strict interpreter of the First Amendment rights.
She insists in her article that "You can't OD [overdose] on the First Amendment, because free speech is its own best antidote" (Jacoby 31). She suggests that all speech, regardless of the level of offensiveness it has, should be protected.