Is the Bible Indictable?

Annie Besant

Description

In the 1870s, firebrand activist Annie Besant and her friend Charles Bradlaugh made the risky decision to republish an American book called The Fruits of Philosophy, which includes frank discussions of sexual intimacy and rudimentary birth-control methods, in Britain. The two were prosecuted on charges of obscenity. In this wittily incisive essay, Besant applies the extremely broad criteria used to judge that work as obscene to the Bible.

Sujets

• Philosophie et théologie
• Philosophy of religion

Informations

• Publié par: The Floating Press
• Date de parution: 01 juin 2014
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781776537334
• Langue: English

Extrait

IS THE BIBLE INDICTABLE?
BEING AN ENQUIRY WHETHER THE BIBLE COMES WITHIN THE RULING OF THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE AS TO OBSCENE LITERATURE
* * *
ANNIE BESANT
 
*
Is the Bible Indictable? Being an Enquiry Whether the Bible Comes Within the Ruling of the Lord Chief Justice as to Obscene Literature Epub ISBN 978-1-77653-733-4 Also available: PDF ISBN 978-1-77653-734-1 © 2014 The Floating Press and its licensors. All rights reserved. While every effort has been used to ensure the accuracy and reliability of the information contained in The Floating Press edition of this book, The Floating Press does not assume liability or responsibility for any errors or omissions in this book. The Floating Press does not accept responsibility for loss suffered as a result of reliance upon the accuracy or currency of information contained in this book. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Many suitcases look alike. Visit www.thefloatingpress.com
Is the Bible Indictable?
*
AN ENQUIRY WHETHER THE BIBLE COMES WITHIN THE RULING OF THE LORD CHIEFJUSTICE AS TO OBSCENE LITERATURE.
The ruling of Sir Alexander Cockburn in the late trial, the Queen against Bradlaugh and Besant, seems to involve wider issues than theLord Chief Justice intended, or than the legal ally of Nature andProvidence can desire. The question of motive is entirely set on oneside; the purest motives are valueless if the information conveyed issuch as is capable of being turned to bad purposes by the evil-mindedand the corrupt. This view of the law would not be enforced againstexpensive medical works; provided that the price set on a book be suchas shall keep it out of reach of the "common people," its teaching maybe thoroughly immoral but it is not obscene. Dr. Fleetwood Churchill,for instance, is not committing an indictable offence by givingdirections as to the simplest and easiest way of procuring abortion; heis not committing a misdemeanour, although he points out means which anywoman could obtain and use for herself; he does not place himself withinreach of