Civil Liberties
Civil Liberties | Censorship of Violence in Popular Entertainment Is Not Justified
About the author: Judith Levine is a journalist, essayist, and the coauthor of Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex. The following viewpoint is excerpted from Shooting the Messenger: Why Censorship Won’t Stop Violence, a report that Levine prepared for the Media Coalition, a free speech advocacy group.
In May 1999, shortly after the Littleton, Colorado, murders, a North Carolina high-school student typed the words “The end is near” on a computer screen as a joke about millennial madness. Another student saw the message, called it a threat,...
[The entire page is 1547 words long]
Navigate
- Introduction
-
Chapter 1: Should Limits Be Placed on Freedom of Expression?
- Chapter 1 Preface
- Censorship of Violence in Popular Entertainment Is Justified
- Censorship of Pornography May Be Justified
- A Constitutional Amendment Against Flag Desecration Is Justified
- Restrictions Against Hate Speech Are Necessary
- Censorship of Violence in Popular Entertainment Is Not Justified
- Censorship of Sex-Related Speech Violates the First Amendment
- A Constitutional Amendment Against Flag Desecration Would Undermine the First Amendment
- Restrictions Against Hate Speech Violate the First Amendment
- Restrictions Against Offensive Speech Harm Society
- The Use of Military Tribunals to Try Suspected Terrorists Is Not Justified
-
Chapter 2: Does Separation of Church and State Threaten Religious Liberty?
- Chapter 2 Preface
- The Constitution’s Framers Did Not Intend Strict Separation of Church and State
- Prohibiting School Prayer Threatens Religious Liberty
- Faith-Based Social Services Organizations Should Be Eligible for Federal Funding
- The Constitution’s Framers Intended Strict Separation of Church and State
- School Prayer Threatens Religious Liberty
- Faith-Based Social Services Organizations Should Not Be Eligible for Federal Funding
-
Chapter 3: Is the Right to Privacy Threatened?
- Chapter 3 Preface
- Loss of Privacy Is a Serious Problem
- Stronger Privacy Protection Laws Are Necessary
- Individuals’ Ability to Communicate Anonymously Via the Internet Is Threatened
- Face-Recognition Technology Threatens Individual Privacy
- The Threat to Privacy Is Exaggerated
- Stronger Privacy Protection Laws Are Unnecessary
- Individuals Should Not Be Allowed to Communicate Anonymously Via the Internet
- Face-Recognition Technology Does Not Threaten Individual Privacy
-
Chapter 4: Does the Threat of Terrorism Justify Curtailment of Civil Liberties?
- Chapter 4 Preface
- Curtailment of Civil Liberties Is Justified in Times of Crisis
- The Use of Military Tribunals to Try Suspected Terrorists Is Justified
- The Use of Torture May Be Justified in Certain Circumstances
- Government Anti- Terrorism Measures Threaten to Severely Weaken Civil Liberties
- The Government Should Not Authorize the Use of Torture to Combat Terrorism
- Organizations to Contact
- Bibliography
- Copyright
Tell a friend about Civil Liberties at eNotes.
