Editor,
I am writing in response to Hunter Esmiol’s letter on the moral evils of pornography. It saddens me to see a constant parade of letters through the Daily Lobo demanding that one or more rights belonging to American citizens be removed in the interest of that particular person’s religious belief. In this case, it appears that the First Amendment, which protects not only freedom of speech but also freedom of religion, has come under fire.
Esmiol begins by relating three acts of violence — Locksley, Lambert and Fort Hood — one of which resulted in numerous deaths — to pornography, which is referred to as a “most serious and, now, open obsession.” While I fail to see how the non-consensual taking of human life can in any way be compared to the optional viewing of the use of reproductive organs in a recreational manner, the relationship is still implied.
Esmiol then quotes a religious leader who immediately claims that pornography is the work of “Satan,” who, unfortunately, is not a credible source to blame. This same religious leader cites a number of methods of free speech which include “the printed page, movies … obscene lyrics” — protected by the First Amendment and not, strictly speaking, pornography — “vulgarities on the telephone,” — which I assume refers to phone sex. Finally, this quote features a truly perfect example of the slippery slope fallacy, claiming that anyone “lulled by this lie” will invariably fall into “a terribly immoral, addictive habit” which will proceed to “exercise this vicious control.”
Esmiol then personally implies that pornography, a form of free speech, has no place being reported in this or any newspaper. As far as I can tell, the idea being put forward is that if it’s still legal, then at least we can try to suppress any knowledge of it from getting out to corrupt people. He then offensively and fallaciously states, “Those who don’t support these statements are in support of pornography and all its consequences.” To this, I respond that no situation is ever that black and white, and countering an argument that demands we sacrifice freedom so that a narrow-minded individual can be a missionary against what they see as corruption does not mean that I personally support pornography. I support the rights that we have as citizens to express ourselves, including your right to whine about those rights.
Austin Burke
UNM student
