Phyllis Schlafly Attacks Video Game Court Decisions

schlafly.jpgConservative commentator Phyllis Schlafly has criticized the unbroken string of First Amendment decisions which have protected video games in recent years.

In a column for World Net Daily, Schlafly writes:

Extremely violent video games have become the dangerous obsession of a significant portion of our youth, and several towns and states have passed ordinances intended to prevent minors from buying or viewing them. But judicial supremacists are striking down these laws by claiming this extremely graphic violence deserves the same First Amendment protection as Shakespeare..

Judge Roger L. Wollman [Minnesota Case] … observed that “great literature includes many themes and descriptions of violence… See, e.g., Judges 4:21 (NIV) (‘But Jael, Heber’s wife, picked up a tent peg and a hammer and went quietly to [Sisera] while he lay fast asleep, exhausted. She drove the peg through his temple into the ground and he died.’).” What Wollman failed to add is that a literary description of violence in the Bible does not engage a teenager in role-playing or desensitize him to the harm…

Schlafly would, apparently, like to impose her definition of free speech, rather than the one upheld in nine federal court cases: 

Legitimate free speech expresses violence in a rational context, rather than displaying it graphically to evoke an immediate emotional reaction. It is not a First Amendment right to cause panic on an airplane by shouting that someone has a bomb; nor is it legitimate free speech to evoke violent reactions in children through graphic video games…

A teenager who learns how to murder and mutilate human beings in video games is desensitized to commit heinous crimes against his neighbors. Nothing in the First Amendment should prevent regulations to stop this, supremacist judges to the contrary notwithstanding.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

Comments are closed.