Skip to main content
Log in

Obscene words and the law

  • Published:
Law and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper asks whether the criminal law can have any legitimate concern with obscene language. At most, such a concern could be justified by the need to protect auditors from offense, since it is not plausible to think of exposure to dirty words as harmful or inherently immoral. A distinction is drawn between “bare utterance and instant offense,” on the one hand, and offensive nuisance and harassment, on the other. Only when obscene language is used to harass can it properly be made criminal. Finally, I criticize in some detail judicial reasoning in the case of F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation, and conclude that obscene language on the public media is not properly subject to governmental regulation, whether- by criminal law or otherwise. *** DIRECT SUPPORT *** A9102008 00002

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Feinberg, J. Obscene words and the law. Law Philos 2, 139–161 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00144446

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00144446

Keywords

Navigation