Internet Pornography Regulation

The issue of whether pornographic materials accessible online should be regulated by the government is hotly contested at the moment, and has been for over a decade. Bill after bill has been proposed for tighter regulation of internet pornography, however the majority have been shot down by congress, due to the ever present concern of violating the 1^st Amendment right to Free Speech. Is it possible to keep harmful pornographic material out of the reach of minors, and maintain adult rights to view what they wish? Although there are concerns to the contrary due to the 1^st Amendment pressures, it is apparent from looking at the regulation proposed by foreign governments that the internet can in fact be regulated without losing economic or social freedoms for adults.

When defending an unregulated internet, there are two primary schools of thought which have prevailed since the introduction of the issue, who are on either extreme of the regulation argument. The first of these is the moralistic viewpoint, that which says that pornography is fundamentally wrong (often from a basis originating in organized religion) and therefore should be regulated not only to prevent access from innocent minors, but also to protect consenting adults. This case is a matter of personal opinion, and is generally held as a matter of unwavering belief rather than organized argument, and therefore will not be discussed here. A more important counterpoint, and one which has been utilized by congress multiple times to drop bills extending internet regulation, is the right to free speech. However this places undue strain on parents who have to monitor their children's internet usage constantly without proper protective measures, and does not take into account pornographic materials which are illegal on or off the internet, such as child pornography.