Quote:

---

Originally posted by deepgirl187:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080610/ap_on_re_us/obscenity_or_art

I'm not here to start a huge flame war about people's views on pornography or what have you. But I would like to hear people's opinions on the idea of obscenity.

In my opinion, Miller v. California, a landmark obscenity law (and the one used to prosecute many obscenity cases currently) has to be one of the most subjective (and useless) pieces of law there is. The very idea of obscenity has been interpreted and reinterpreted so often throughout history, that it seems almost pointless for the law to exist at all. It's one thing if the material in question is being aimed at children, or if illegal acts are being committed. But to me, this is a little too close too the line in terms of First Amendment rights (too be honest, I think it pretty much tramples on them).

For instance, the tapes in questions for this case are supposed to contain violence against women. In that case, I suppose there's a large slew of films, fictional or no, that can be categorized as obscene (the recent trend of torture porn, like Hostel, Turistas, and Captivity, comes to mind). No matter where you go or what you do, there will always be something that someone finds obscene and offensive. And likewise, some things that others find offensive don't bother some people at all. So how the hell can we define objective terms (and laws) about what is or what isn't obscene?

Not claiming to be right (or an expert) but here's my two cents, anyway. What about you guys?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by deepgirl187:
Not claiming to be right (or an expert) but here's my two cents, anyway. What about you guys?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
Even the defense attorney in this case says his client's videos are disgusting and disturbing, but maintains that it falls under the "protection" of it being "art". Personally, I fail to see how urine and feces used in any form is art, but I do believe the prosecution will lose the case nonetheless.

---