期刊文献+

试析19世纪末美国的淫秽物品标准

Analysis of American Obscenity Standard in the End of 19th Century
原文传递
导出
摘要 在美国早期历史上,淫秽物品的数量不多,政府调控又得到民众的普遍支持,所以有关淫秽物品的标准并没有确定。在内战后,淫秽物品因其市场的扩大和社会净化运动的兴起,成为一个全国性的议题。社会各界人士在普遍赞成查禁淫秽物品的同时,对淫秽物品的含义界定存在分歧,遂希望由法院制定明确的司法标准。在这种背景下,纽约法院在1879年的"合众国诉贝内特案"引入希克林标准,后经最高法院的确认,成为美国各级法院评判淫秽物品的主导原则。然而,到世纪之交,随着内在的道德话语受到动摇,希克林标准开始遭到社会各界的广泛质疑。 In the early American stage, the quantity of obscenity was small, and government regulations had general support, which was not necessary to develop obscenity test. After the Civil War, obscenity became a national issue , owing to its market expansion and the rise of social society movement , which needed one clear judicial standard by court . Because The Community generally agreeded to suppress obscenity , while disagreed upon the definition of obscenity . In this context, the New York court in "United States v. Bennett" cited Hieklin test, then affirmed by Supreme Court , became the dominant principle of obscenity test by American courts at all levels. However, At the turn of the century, the Hicklin test was questioned by Community, due to the inherent moral discourse was shaken.
作者 王娟娟
出处 《历史教学(下半月)》 CSSCI 2014年第5期48-53,共6页 History Teaching
关键词 希克林标准 淫秽物品 社会净化运动 Hicklin Test, Obscenity, The Social Purity Movement
  • 相关文献

参考文献45

  • 1M. C. Slough and S. J. Mcanany P. D., "Obscenity and Constitutional Freedom", Saint Louis University Ltnu Journal, Vol. 8, Issue 3 ( Spring 1964).
  • 2张世耘.淫秽色情的认定标准与言论自由的冲突——美国联邦最高法院判例探微[J].国际关系学院学报,2007(2):48-52. 被引量:14
  • 3Mary M. Cronin, "The Liberty to Argue Freely: Nineteenth-Century Obscenity Prosecutions and the Emergence of Modem Liber- tarian Free Speech Discourse", Journalism and Communication Monographs, Autumn 2006.
  • 4Janice Wood, "Physicians and Obscenity: A Struggle for Free Speech, 1872-1915", Journalism History, Spring 2010.
  • 5Janice Ruth Wood, The Struggle over Free Speech in the United States, 1872-1915: Edward Bliss Foate, Edward Bond Foote, and Anti-Corn- stock Operations, New York: Roufledge, 2008.
  • 6Chapter 270, 5 Statute. 548, 566 (1842).
  • 7John D'Emilio and EsteUe B.Freedman, Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America, New York: Harper & Row, 1988, p.131.
  • 8Post Office Act, Chapter 89, 13 Statute 504, 507 (1865).
  • 9LawrenceM. Friedman, Law in America" A Short History, New York: Modem Library, 2004, p.97.
  • 10Chapter 180, 20 Statute, 355, 359 (1879).

二级参考文献19

  • 1[1]Laurence Tribe.American Constitutional Law,2nd ed[M].New York:Foundation Press,1988.
  • 2[2]Regina v.Hicklin.Law Reports 3 Queen's Bench 360[R].1868.
  • 3[3]Butler v.State of Michigan,352 U.S.380[R].1957.
  • 4[4]John S.Mill.On Liberty[A].John Stuart Mill:Three Essays[ C].Oxford:Oxford UP,1975.
  • 5[5]John Milton.Areopagitica[ A].Roy Flannagan.The Riverside Milton[ C].New York:Houghton Mifflin,1998.
  • 6[6]Gordon Hawkins,Franklin E.Zimring,Pornography in a Free Society[M].Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1991.
  • 7[7]Abramsv.United States,250U.S.616[R].1919.
  • 8[8]Chaplinsky v.State of New Hampshire,315 U.S.568[R].1942.
  • 9[9]United States v.Kennerley,209 Fed.119 (S.D.N.Y.)[R].1913.
  • 10[10]Schenck v.United States,249 U.S.47[R].1919.

共引文献13

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部