Wednesday, July 8, 2015

Obscenity and the Electoral College

Today was a rather normal and monotonous day. I awoke really late at around 9:30 AM, groggy, cold, and a bit dizzy. With little time to spare, I put on a t-shirt, jeans and a light sweater. I had no time for breakfast, nor was I hungry anyways, so I decided to head straight for class.

In the morning session of class today, we went over the controversial topics of obscenity and censorship. Instead of a usual mundane lecture, Michelle divided us into groups and assigned us cases to teach to the class. My group was assigned Roth v. United States. In this case, the petitioner, Roth, was convicted of mailing obscene material and a book entitled American Aphrodite. The book contained literary erotica and contained nude photographs, which violated a federal obscenity statue. The question in this case is whether state obscenity restrictions that prohibit the sale/ transfer of obscenity violate the freedom of expression clause of the First Amendment. The Court ruled that no, obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. In the Court's majority opinion, Justice Brennan stated that sexual obscenity is one of the vital problems of human interest and public concern. I believe that the Court's decision in this case was in accordance to the Constitution as obscenity is not a form of speech that encourages academic and intelligent discussion but rather advocates lawless and reckless behavior.

During the afternoon session, Michelle gave us time to do some research on the cases we would write about for our five page essays due by the end of the program. Luckily, we were given a huge amount of freedom to choose any case of our choice. After some quick Google searches, I decided to tackle one of the most influential cases of the 21st Century, Bush v. Gore. Why did I decide to do this case? The power that the Supreme Court asserted in this case really peaked my interest and only enticed me to dig deeper. When Michelle asked me how I'd plan on structuring my essay, I told her that I was planning on tying this case with the Electoral College's problems and how it should be either abolished or altered. Michelle looked at me with a stunned face, offered me her help if needed, and wished me luck on my paper. 

Now since this blog is rather short and to the point, I want to try something different. I want to hear your opinion (the reader) on whether you think I'm crazy for attempting to write this essay based on how obsolete the Electoral College is and trying to connect it with the Bush v. Gore case. Am I crazy? Or can it be done? Also, what do you think? Do you think that the Electoral College is to be abolished or altered? Or do you think that it's the best system to go with for our government? Be creative with your comments...

1 comment:

  1. I think the electoral college should be abolished, too! How absolutely ridiculous it is that someone's vote in Iowa counts so much more than mine in California? I think the country should be divided into regions and then campaigns can be done in an area like the south or midwest or northeast or west coast. After a few weeks of campaigning, voting and majority wins. This idea that someone can get a majority of the vote and still lose is just wrong. Let's talk about this more.