Magazine April 6, 2020, Issue

Letters

The Supreme Court building in Washington, D.C. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

Pornography and Free Speech

Madeleine Kearns, in her piece on pornography (February 24), prescribes two approaches to the problem she identifies, one that celebrates constitutional values and one that rejects them. Her first proposal is for pornography’s opponents to engage in a campaign of persuasion against pornography modeled on the public-health response to tobacco use. She seeks in this way to compete in the marketplace of ideas, advancing empirical and moral arguments against the arguments of the pornographers and the “misguided” civil libertarians in favor of free access to pornography. So far, so good.

Her second prescription betrays the first: She would

Something to Consider

If you enjoyed this article, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS. Members get all of our content (including the magazine), no paywalls or content meters, an advertising-minimal experience, and unique access to our writers and editors (through conference calls, social media groups, and more). And importantly, NRPLUS members help keep NR going.

If you enjoyed this article and want to see more content like this, we have a proposition for you: Join NRPLUS.

 

Join Now
NR Editors includes members of the editorial staff of the National Review magazine and website.

In This Issue

Articles

Features

Books, Arts & Manners

Sections

Letters

Letters

A reader responds to Madeleine Kearns’s article, ‘Pornography Is a Public-Health Problem.’

Recommended

The Latest