Assertion: obscenity | /r/HasProperty | material
Facets:
value: with a tendency
type: OTHER
Source sentences:
text: The Roth case gave a clearer standard for deciding what constitutes pornography, stating that obscenity is material where the "dominant theme taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest", and that the "average person, applying contemporary community standards" would disapprove of, reaffirming the 1913 case United States v. Kennerley.
text: Obscenity is any material with a tendency to “deprave and corrupt the morals of those whose minds are open to such influence.
text: WT: It still doesn’t seem very cut-and-dry, I mean, the judges all had standard definitions in that case, and there was another one, another case, “Miller v California” in ’73 that set up this standard that says that “obscenity is material that lacks serious literary artistic political or scientific value.