Soc 120 Week 1 Ashford University

“Something’s are just wrong”
Jessica Barnett
SOC120
Richard Abshier
Aug. 27, 2012

In "Some Moral Minima," Lenn Goodman argues that there are certain things that are simply wrong. Do you think Goodman is right?
One of the most controversial subjects is that of pornography. So many people argue over whether or not it should be legal. I would agree that something’s are just wrong, however is is really our place to attempt to force others to live according to our beliefs? I think trying to force our personal beliefs on others is wrong. If the United States was run this way this would be a socialistic country.
“Some have argued that the production of pornography involves the exploitation and mistreatment of women; thus, consumers of pornography support an industry that harms women. This may be true, but it has little bearing on restricting the rights of adult access to pornography. Many people work in industries that involve serious threats in hazardous situations: coal miners, electricians, and farmers, among others. To argue that pornography should be highly regulated, or censored, because some people have been mistreated in its production is the same as arguing that restaurants should be closed because some restaurants have had health code violations.”
As it says in the text above many people may argue that porn is something that encourages the mistreatment of women. In some circumstances I would agree. Some pornography is done forcefully and both parties are not willing. I will fully admit that these types of videos are floating around the internet and it is unfortunate. However, I will also argue that many videos are consensual sex between equal parties and I do not think that this is wrong in anyway. If some people wish to view these types of vidoes, I do believe that they should have the right to view them. Pornography should be regulated as it is to protect the youth of America, however in no way should it be made illegal. This is one example of something that people argue that is “just wrong”.
People share differences of opinion and in some people’s eyes this might be wrong, but who are we to tell others the things that they should and should not watch?
Another big issue in America today is the restrictions that are and are not placed on gun ownership. Many people argue that more restrictions should be placed while others fight to protect the rights given to us by our forefathers through the Constitution of the United States. I am one of the latter. I believe that we should be able to freely own guns. The reason we have the right bare arms is in case the government becomes corrupt as the crown was to the colonist. This way we have the right to overturn the government if the time ever came that it was needed. While there are people who are getting guns who are using them for negative things, people will always find ways to get the things that they want. Remember the prohibition. The consumption of alcohol was illegal, yet people found ways to get it. If you illegalize everything that has the possibility to be negative thing our freedoms would be completely wrong.
“The Constitution of the United States—specifically the Second Amendment, which outlines the specific right for the people to "keep and bear arms"—is quite clear. That right simply cannot be infringed, or taken away. Just as the other rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are guaranteed by the Constitution—freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly—the right to keep and bear arms cannot be taken away from the people who live under the Constitution and its amendments (which includes, of course, the Bill of Rights). Fundamentally, there is no further argument needed: the right to keep and bear arms is a constitutionally protected right, and that is sufficient to establish that there should be few restrictions on gun ownership. Any such restrictions on gun ownership would have to meet the kind of requirements one might put on free speech: an overriding public interest, where the good of the vast majority of the public requires some restrictions. But those restrictions must be absolutely minimal and must be shown to be absolutely necessary. Both the law and common morality have found, in very few cases, a need to limit free speech: generally in order to guarantee public safety. In the same way, any restrictions on gun possession must be shown to meet that very high standard, and to be an unavoidable threat to the general public without those restrictions.”
What it comes down to is this. If you do not like something don’t do it then, but we have no right to tell people that what they can and cannot do. This is a direct infringement on our constitutional rights.