The censorship of internet sites linked with violence and pornography Essay Example

The censorship of internet sites linked with violence and pornography Essay Example The censorship of internet sites linked with violence and pornography Essay The censorship of internet sites linked with violence and pornography Essay With the invention of computer and the broadcast media via the internet enabling the avalanche of information and other possibilities, is the expansion of man’s reach to have his â€Å"forbidden† desires fulfilled. Because the idea of these inventions – in particular, the internet had made the world into what â€Å"one global village†, the good, as oftentimes supposed, outweighs the bad. Then again, it is naà ¯vetà © to ignore scores of incidents relating to the influence of the non-regulation or minimal regulation of internet sites with ties to violence or pornography. There is truth that we cannot prevent people who think of earning much from the basest of human’s needs or even by the sheer enjoyment or perversion of it; however, to turn the other way and allow the proliferation of these sites without sanctions, is essentially inviting violence or perversion to visit our doorsteps. It is the stand of this paper that internet sites linked to inc idents of violence or pornography be censored. This argument evidences on ethics and researches made on the issues. Discussion Many of those who become responsible parents recognize the potential dangers of unsupervised children exploring the internet. The accessibility (virtually everywhere) of internet, from the home to the school, and cafà ©s in every neighborhood, accounts for the possibility that anytime, children will be exposed to highly violent or pornographic internet materials. Some think that with the net explosion, it has become a vogue and an accepted fact that possibly, the threat to the effects on behavior and psyche of children and adolescents in particular, and to the larger community in general has been exaggerated by what they call as â€Å"alarmists.† A. Arguments for Non-censorship On the pros camp, several reasons and/or premises prevail to satisfy their position that there is no need for censorship. Firstly, the fact that the US Supreme Court decided to honor the freedom of speech provision of the constitution, is evidence enough that there is no adequate basis for the censorship of these identified sites. Secondly, people, they argue, just don’t â€Å"accidentally† type and get logged on onto sites as these; the reason being that children when using the internet do not have interests on sites, i.e. violent and pornographic, that cater to adult needs. Thirdly, sites that are available for adults usually require registration and are strong deterrents to minors who navigate these sites for curiosity-sake. B. Argument for Censorship Firstly, the US Supreme Court’s decision to uphold freedom of speech does not translate with the acceptance that there is no threat at all of the effects of the navigation of these sites by children, adolescents and adults. These are two differing premises and should be addressed differently. What is at stake between these two is actually the choice between ethical considerations. Up to now, whoever comprises the SC must not only answer to what is just legal. The provisions in our constitution are subject to interpretations, and interpretations, no matter ho seemingly rational, can oftentimes be unethical. Moreover, interpretations depend on the person/s behind these, and people can err, no matter their position, learning, or status in life. Secondly, the argument that â€Å"people (or children/teens for that matter) just don’t accidentally ‘type’ and navigate toward these sites† could true but practically, not at all times. In a study by Greenfield (2004, p.741-750), the â€Å"inadvertent exposure† and its results show that in more ways than one, many children and teens do indeed, experience this by way of peer-to-peer file-sharing and in some other manner. Thirdly, the third pro-camp argument referring to registration requirements as strong deterrent to teens and children, does not weigh towards the non-censorship of these sites. A mere examination or test to any one of these sites would show you that even without registration, an individual will be exposed to sexually stimulating pictures and many other samples of these variety. These samples are enough to whet the appetite of any teen to do what he could do to gain access to these sites. Conclusion It is wrong to say that there is not enough evidence to point the relationship between internet violence and pornography sites to actual negative behavior of children and teens. Research shows that pornography triggers deviant behavior (â€Å"contributes or facilitates sexual addiction†) and may manifest in â€Å"unwanted compulsive sexual acting out, voyeurism, sadomasochism, fetishism, child molestation, acts of lasciviousness, rape, etc.† Other consequences include the exploitation of children in being provoked or coerced into doing the sex act. Furthermore, experimental studies’ findings reveal that the constant exposure to pornographic pictures, videos and the like, which are readily available through the internet are â€Å"correlated with premarital sexual permissiveness† (Greenfield, in Malamuth and Impett, 2001), encourages liberal premarital sexual views even with girls, and more importantly, develops considerably more accommodating attitudes on the use of aggression towards women in either sexual or non-sexual relations (Greenfield, in Malamuth and Check, 1981). There is enough proof that point to pornography, (and its accessibility through the net increases the threat and risks) can shape and affect sexual violence, the sexual behavior, overall values of the young people and children. Wherever it may be portrayed, increasing exposure desensitizes the immature minds of children and adolescents to the impact of violence, even encourages the use of it and manifests in aggressive acts of children and youth.

Flodden - Battle of Flodden Field

Flodden - Battle of Flodden Field Battle of Flodden - Conflict Date: The Battle of Flodden was fought September 9, 1513, during the War of the League of Cambrai (1508-1516). Battle of Flodden - Armies Commanders: Scotland King James IV34,000 men England Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey26,000 men Battle of Flodden - Background: Seeking to honor the Auld Alliance with France, King James IV of Scotland declared war on England in 1513. As the army mustered, it transitioned from the traditional Scottish spear to the modern European pike which was being used to great effect by the Swiss and Germans. While trained by the French Comte dAussi, it is unlikely that the Scots had mastered the weapon and maintaining the tight formations required for its use before moving south. Gathering around 30,000 men and seventeen guns, James crossed the border on August 22 and moved to seize Norham Castle. Battle of Flodden - The Scots Advance: Enduring miserable weather and taking high losses, the Scots succeeded in capturing Norham. In the wake of the success, many, tired of the rain and spreading disease, began to desert. While James loitered in Northumberland, King Henry VIIIs northern army began to gather under the leadership of Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey. Numbering around 24,500, Surreys men were equipped with bills, eight-foot long poles with blades at the end made for slashing. Joining his infantry were 1,500 light horsemen under Thomas, Lord Dacre. Battle of Flodden - The Armies Meet: Not wishing the Scots to slip away, Surrey dispatched a messenger to James offering battle on September 9. In an uncharacteristic move for a Scottish king, James accepted stating that he would remain in Northumberland until noon on the appointed day. As Surrey marched, James shifted his army into a fortress-like position atop Flodden, Moneylaws, and Branxton Hills. Forming a rough horseshoe, the position could only be approached from the east and required crossing the River Till. Reaching the Till Valley on September 6, Surrey immediately recognized the strength of the Scottish position. Again dispatching a messenger, Surrey chastised James for taking such a strong position and invited him to do battle on the nearby plains around Milfield. Refusing, James wished to fight a defensive battle on his own terms. With his supplies dwindling, Surrey was compelled to choose between abandoning the area or attempting a flanking march to the north and west to force the Scots out of their position. Opting for the latter, his men began crossing the Till at Twizel Bridge and Milford Ford on September 8. Reaching a position above the Scots, they turned south and deployed facing Branxton Hill. Due to continued stormy weather, James did not become aware of the English maneuver until sometime around noon on September 9. As a result, he began shifting his entire army to Branxton Hill. Formed in five divisions, Lord Hume and the Early of Huntly led the left, the Earls of Crawford and Montrose the left center, James the right center, and the Earls of Argyll and Lennox the right. The Earl of Bothwells division was held in reserve to the rear. Artillery was placed in the spaces between the divisions. At the base of the hill and across a small stream, Surrey deployed his men in similar fashion. Battle of Flodden - Disaster for the Scots: Around 4:00 in the afternoon, James artillery opened fire on the English position. Consisting largely of siege guns, they did little damage. On the English side, Sir Nicholas Appelbys twenty-two guns replied with great effect. Silencing the Scottish artillery, they began a devastating bombardment of James formations. Unable to withdraw over the crest without risking a panic, James continued to take losses. To his left, Hume and Huntly elected to begin the action without orders. Moving their men down the least steep part of the hill, their pikemen advanced toward Edmund Howards troops. Hampered by the severe weather, Howards archers fired with little effect and his formation was shattered by Hume and Huntlys men. Driving through the English, their formation began to dissolve and their advance was checked by Dacres horsemen. Seeing this success, James directed Crawford and Montrose to move forward and began advancing with his own division. Unlike the first attack, these divisions were forced to descend a steep slope which began to open their ranks. Pressing on, additional momentum was lost in crossing the stream. Reaching the English lines, Crawford and Montroses men were disorganized and the bills of Thomas Howard, the Lord Admirals men slashed into their ranks and cut the heads from the Scottish pikes. Forced to rely on swords and axes, the Scots took frightful losses as they were unable to engage the English as close range. To the right, James had some success and pushed back the division led by Surrey. Halting the Scottish advance, James men soon faced a situation similar to Crawford and Montrose. On the right, Argyle and Lennoxs Highlanders remained in position watching the battle. As a result, they failed to notice the arrival of Edward Stanleys division on their front. Though the Highlanders were in a strong position, Stanley saw that it could be flanked to the east. Sending forward a portion of his command to hold the enemy in place, the remainder made a concealed movement to the left and up the hill. Unleashing a massive arrow storm on the Scots from two directions, Stanley was able to force them to flee the field. Seeing Bothwells men advancing to support the king, Stanley reformed his troops and along with Dacre attacked the Scottish reserve from the rear. In a brief fight they were driven off and the English descended on the rear of the Scottish lines. Under attack on three sides, the Scots battled on with James falling in the fighting. By 6:00 PM much of the fighting had ended with the Scots retreating east over the ground held by Hume and Huntly. Battle of Flodden - Aftermath: Unaware of the magnitude of his victory, Surrey remained in place overnight. The next morning, Scottish horsemen were spotted on Branxton Hill but were quickly driven away. The remnants of the Scottish army limped back across the River Tweed. In the fighting at Flodden, the Scots lost around 10,000 men including James, nine earls, fourteen Lords of Parliament, and the Archbishop of St. Andrews. On the English side, Surrey lost around 1,500 men, most from Edmund Howards division. The largest battle in terms of numbers fought between the two nations, it was also Scotlands worst ever military defeat. It was believed at the time that every noble family in Scotland lost at least one person at Flodden. Selected Sources North East England History Pages: Battle of Flodden FieldElectric Scotland: Battle of FloddenUK Battlefields Resource Centre: Battle of Flodden