According to these points, censoring literature is both immoral and wrong, and the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America backs this up. The Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The freedom of speech aspect of this statement refers to the conveying of a person’s personal opinion on a public scale. This idea is often specified as the criticism of the government, but it can also be interpreted as the public admittance of one’s personal beliefs on any subject (Freedom). That admittance …show more content…
These opinions came from people of varying ages, from fifteen to sixty, and they manage to contradict the National Coalition Against Censorship’s argument in “Reaction To ‘The Dirty Cowboy’ Stinks of Censorship”, which argues that children are mentally capable to handle nudity; and they can. Nudity is a basic fact of life, a fact that no one can avoid no matter how hard he tries. This unfounded claim that children are not mature enough, incapable of, and simply should not view nudity conveys how Americans view nudity in relation to children. In European countries (Belgium for example, as seen in Bitso’s article) vulgarity, especially nudity, is viewed as more of a natural part of life rather than a shameful sliver of existence (Bitso). America is considered a nation that is “ahead of times” when in reality, Europe is lightyears ahead of America. The United States of America needs to drop this idea of immaturity in children if its citizens wish to advance to a European-like level of general