North Carolina: explicit or obscene?

Philosophers, theologians, and politicians in Franklin North Carolina must ponder the subtle differences in public sexual behavior. Surely too deep and murky for the local intelligenia here in the Tarheel state.

In regards to sexually oriented businesses and free speech, the Institute of Government at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has written that the line between “sexually explicit” and “obscene” is critical.

A dancer exposing her breasts is said to be “sexually explicit.” Should she expose her genitals the dance would become “obscene.” Obscene material does not enjoy protection by the First Amendment.

The concept is muddled, however, as nude or semi-nude dancing has been found to be “symbolic speech” and receives some modicum of Constitutional protection, so long as it is content neutral. In turn, that speech’s neutrality is judged by its secondary effects — psychological effects on nearby neighborhoods for example.

Franklin ordinance would regulate sexually oriented busineses