Susan Jacobys, A First Amendment Junkie, is an extremely well written and sound argument in which readers can clearly understand the purpose. From the title, A First Amendment Junkie, she gets the readers attention and even forces them to ask the question: What is a A First Amendment junkie It is clear as early as the end of the first paragraph Jacobys thesis or major claim- that censorship of any form is wrong. At the beginning of the second paragraph she states her belief, … in an absolute interpretation of the First Amendment, from which comes the idea of a First Amendment junkie.
Also, the readers get a sense of her persona when she stated that, Many woman I like and respect tell me I am wrong… -we see that shes just another person. It is evident that readers and even feminist that advocates censorship of pornography must put aside or control ones sense of emotion or pathos; so that it does not overshadow Jacobys view ( that is stated ) and will work towards, as well as illustrate to the readers sense of logos from which the purpose of her argument gets its life.There are several reasons that Jacoby states that makes her argument sound, such as: ensorship of pornography by faminist is contradictory, kiddie porn is child abuse and not Mathew 2 a First Amendment issue but an issue of conduct, and the solution is for individuals, not the government to limit the First Amendment but rather to take on an active role in teaching young people what is appropriate to watch or look at on TV, movies, and magazines.Censorship of pornography by faminist is contradictory in that they will help endorse antifeminists to censor discussions and literature about the very things or issues hat are of vital concern to woman: rape, abortion, menstruation, contraception, lesbianism-in fact, the entire range of sexual experience from a womans viewpoint.
If feminists want to argue that the protection of the Constitution should not be extended to any particularly odious or threatening form of speech, they have a resonable argument (although I dont agree with it).But it is ridiculous to suggest that the porn shops on 42nd Street are more disguesting to woman then a march of neo-Nazis is to survivors of the extermination camps. The contradiction is that faminist can not yell censorship for pornography witout yelling cenorship to all and thats the bottom line. Kiddie porn is child abuse and not a First Amendment issue but an issue of conduct on the part of people you abuse there power as adults.
This is also an excellent rebutal to those feminists that use the example of kiddie porn to censor pornography. Jacobys makes a coralation with explotied children that used to work in coal mines and those in kiddie porn and that the responsible adults should be prosecuted. This is one of he main reason in which individuals should take on an active role in teaching young people what is appropriate to watch or look at on TV, movies, and magazines.Mathew 3 Responsible adults and not the calling of the government to limit the First Amendment right to free speech is the only way in which we can teach all people how to tolerate threatening forms of free speech.
As the late Justice Hugo L. Black said that the Federal Governmnet is with out any power whatsoever under the Constitution to put any type of burden on free speech and expression of ideas of any kind ( as distinguished from conduct. )