If we accept censorship of violence in the media, we will have to censor sports and news programs. The First Amendment is based upon the belief that in a free and democratic society, individual adults must be free to decide for themselves what to read, write, paint, draw, see and hear. If we are disturbed by images of violence or sex, we can change the channel, turn off the TV, and decline to go to certain movies or museum exhibits. We can also exercise our own free speech rights by voicing our objections to forms of expression that we don't like. Further, we can exercise our prerogative as parents without resorting to censorship.
Devices now exist that make it possible to block access to specific TV programs and internet sites.
Periodicals that review books, recordings, and films can help parents determine what they feel is appropriate for their youngsters. Viewing decisions can, and should, be made at home, without government interference. The Supreme Court's current definition of constitutionally unprotected Obscenity, first announced in a 1973 case called Miller v. California , has three requirements. This vague concept continues to baffle both the public and the courts. Pornography comes in as many varieties as the human sexual impulse and is protected by the First Amendment unless it meets the definition for illegal obscenity.