R. v Butler [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452 - Supreme Court of Canada
...(b) of the Charter. 3. The Court feels that the Sections 163(1) only minimally limits the freedom of expression in the case of eroctic material as it does not limit any material of "scientific, artistic, or literary merit". The accused feels that the law unlawfully restricts his ability to sell material that is of artistic merit and is not "offensively obscene". Personally, I agree with the accused because I feel that sex can be a very artistic thing if publication is made properly and that those employed to part take in these publications are still being treated in a manner that meets. the basic requirements of human rights. 4. Yes it does because it limits a person's ability to reach a state of self-fulfillment through the act of creating, selling, or viewing "hard-core" ponographic material. As long as the material is not unreasonably obscene (by the standards of the "community standards test"), it should be allowed. 5. They basically looked at the law, it's link to the preservation of the right(s) in question, and it's effects on society. The relationship between obscenity and the risk of harm to soceity is what is truly is at question. Did the law's unreasonable li...