With the 7th district court’s denial of Illinois’s SEVGL appeal, many have breathed a huge sigh of relief. However, these demagogues declaration of war is far from over. The good guys have won the battle but it was only a small win in the grand scope of things. It is plausible that an effort will be made to progress this case to the supreme court while making minor modifications and language alterations to the original bill. If and when that moment comes, the great debate will be reborn with as much malevolence, belligerence, and oppugnancy as ever before. The great debate is not a debate of one issue but of a multitude of particularities and dependent tenets. One of these tenets for both sides is censorship and parental rights.
Censorship, by definition, is “The force that represses ideas, impulses, and feelings, and prevents them from entering consciousness in their original, undisguised forms.” Censorship is thrown around far to often as if we were living in the fifties and everyone considered different was accused of communism. In theory, you could apply censorship to Porn, heroine, and methamphetamine’s, being that it’s considered censorship if it “represses impulses and feelings”. Does heroine not give its user a sensation or feeling? Pornography, although legal but highly regulated, could fall under the same category because it can repress natural “impulses”. Censorship is an ambiguous term and in my opinion is not relevant to the argument. To use censorship as the foundation for a debate is like building a beach front castle on the sand. It will fall like Eric Morales in the third round.
Parental rights are probably the most important factor in this debate. Parental authority can arguably be the most imperative factor in society.
More coming soon .......
