Congress and Educators are called for action
...The strength of the evidence comes from the qualification of the Commission’s members. The members were sociologists, psychiatrists, lawyers, professors, clergy, news community, and researchers: professions that are engaged in some ways into obscenity and pornography issues. Both Congress and Educators would have not taken into consideration an argument of a delicate topic based on opinion of unqualified professionals. Also, because Congress established the Commission, and the President appointed its members, it made the Commission’s report a legitimate source of information. Data from respectable sources are taken more seriously and have a more powerful influence. The arguments were based on extensive research accompanied by statistical studies and data rather than opinion or superficial observance. Throughout multiple studies, the Commission found that exposure to pornographic materials has no significant influence on already established “sexuality or sexual morality” (2). One study found that the person exposed to pornographic materials became more tolerant in regard to other’s sexuality, but his own standards did not change. In other studies, the person’s attitudes became either more liberal or more conservative, and in some cases changes were not observed (2). The Commission also studied the effect of the availability of erotic material on rates of sex crimes in Denmark and United States. In Demark, an increase in availability of sexual material was accompanied by a decrease of sex crimes. However, in the United States the availability of pornographic materials neither decreased nor increased the rates of sex crime (3,4). Based on these results Congress and Educators would have been able to make more accurate decisions. Although the majority of the arguments presented in the report were directed to both of the audiences, some arguments were oriented just to Congress. The report cited some legislative effort to adopt laws prohibiting the trade of sexual materials in the past that was practically inapplicable because of the vagueness of the Constitution regard pornography (11). And, if laws were to be established the lack of agreement among Americans whether or not pornographic materials should be available to adults posed an even major difficulty on tits enforcement (13). A lot of resources would have been necessary. Congress being responsible for adoption of laws in the public policy process always considers the cost of regulation and enforcement of laws. Also, the Constitution was mentioned in the report as proof of Americans’ right of speech and communication (14). The Rule of Law Principle enforces Congress members to exercise discretion on dealing with people; law limits them. I believe Congress, more than any other group of society, knows the power of the Constitution in American life and would have taken in consideration all the arguments presented in the report. Some arg...