home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky news.sysadmin:1448 news.admin:8536 news.admin.policy:393
- Path: sparky!uunet!ornl!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!darwin.sura.net!wupost!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!gossip.pyramid.com!pyramid!octopus!sjsumcs!rick
- From: rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner)
- Newsgroups: news.sysadmin,news.admin,news.admin.policy
- Subject: Re: What is pornography, anyway?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov15.205436.2043@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu>
- Date: 15 Nov 92 20:54:36 GMT
- References: <josh.721618381@mowgli> <BxMu36.IM9@cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Nov13.153824.27660@news.columbia.edu>
- Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.
- Lines: 27
-
- dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
-
- >In article <BxMu36.IM9@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
- >>===== ftp eff.org:pub/academic/law/miller =======
- >>The Supreme Court's definition of obscenity (the so-called _Miller_
- >>test) is:
- >>
- >>
- >>3) when taken as a whole, it "must lack serious literary, artistic,
- >>political, or scientific value"
- >>
- > Does this include educational value? Maybe a combination of literary
- >and scientific? An intro sexuality text doesn't pass any of these specific
- >tests, but has some 'value', right?
-
- Note that this was the basis of the successful defense against a child
- pornography charge against the gallery director in Cincinatti. The
- Mapplethorpe photographs depicting nude children were art, said the
- defense. And the jury agreed.
-
-
- >DanZ
-
- >--
- >This article is for entertainment purposes only. Any facts, opinions,
- >narratives or ideas contained herein are not necessarily true, and do
- >not necessarily represent the views of any particular person.
-