Public morality in the context of "Roman censor"

⭐ In the context of the Roman censor, public morality is considered…

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Public morality

Public morality refers to moral and ethical standards enforced in a society, by law or police work or social pressure, and applied to public life, to the content of the media, and to conduct in public places.

Public morality often means regulation of sexual matters, including prostitution and homosexuality, but also matters of dress and nudity, pornography, acceptability in social terms of cohabitation before marriage, and the protection of children. It is a main justification for censorship; it can lead to campaigns against profanity, and so be at odds with freedom of speech. Gambling is generally controlled: casinos have been considered much more of a threat than large-scale lotteries or football pools. Public drunkenness is quite unacceptable in some societies, and legal control of consumption of alcohol is often justified in terms of public morality, just as much as for medical reasons or to limit alcohol-related crime. Drug legislation, historically speaking, has sometimes followed on similar reasoning. Abortion is sometimes treated as an aspect of public morality, even if it is legally defined, regulated by medical professionals, and almost entirely hidden from public view. AIDS as a health policy issue is linked to public morality in a complicated manner. A famous remark on male homosexuality of Mrs Patrick Campbell, that she did not care what people did as long as they "didn't frighten the horses", shows that in some sense even high tolerance expects a public limitation on behaviour. At the opposite extreme a theocracy may equate public morality with religious instruction, and give both the equal force of law.

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<

👉 Public morality in the context of Roman censor

The censor was a magistrate in ancient Rome who was responsible for maintaining the census, supervising public morality, and overseeing certain aspects of the government's finances.

Established under the Roman Republic, power of the censor was limited in subject matter but absolute within his sphere: in matters reserved for the censors, no magistrate could oppose his decisions, and only another censor who succeeded him could cancel those decisions. Censors were also given unusually long terms of office; unlike other elected offices of the Republic, which (excluding certain priests elected for life) had terms of 12 months or less, censors' terms were generally 18 months to 5 years (depending on the era). The censorate was thus highly prestigious, preceding all other regular magistracies in dignity if not in power and reserved with rare exceptions for former consuls. Attaining the censorship would thus be considered the crowning achievement of a Roman politician on the cursus honorum. However, the magistracy as a regular office did not survive the transition from the Republic to the Empire.

↓ Explore More Topics
In this Dossier

Public morality in the context of Traditionalism (Spain)

Traditionalism (Spanish: tradicionalismo) is a Spanish political doctrine formulated in the early 19th century and developed until today. It understands politics as implementing Catholic social teaching and the social kingship of Jesus Christ, with Catholicism as the state religion and Catholic religious criteria regulating public morality and every legal aspect of Spain. In practical terms it advocates a loosely organized monarchy combined with strong royal powers, with some checks and balances provided by organicist representation, and with society structured on a corporative basis. Traditionalism rejects democracy, human rights, constitution, universal suffrage, sovereignty of the people, division of powers, religious liberty, freedom of speech, equality of individuals, and parliamentarism. The doctrine was adopted as the theoretical platform of the Carlist socio-political movement, though it appeared also in a non-Carlist incarnation. Traditionalism has never exercised major influence among the Spanish governmental strata, yet periodically it was capable of mass mobilization and at times partially filtered into the ruling practice.

↑ Return to Menu

Public morality in the context of Prohibition in the United States

The Prohibition era was the period from 1920 to 1933 when the United States prohibited the production, importation, transportation, and sale of alcoholic beverages. The alcohol industry was curtailed by a succession of state legislatures, and Prohibition was formally introduced nationwide under the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified on January 16, 1919. Prohibition ended with the ratification of the Twenty-first Amendment, which repealed the Eighteenth Amendment on December 5, 1933.

A wide coalition of mostly Protestants, prohibitionists first attempted to end the trade in alcoholic drinks during the 19th century. They aimed to heal what they saw as an ill society beset by alcohol-related problems such as alcoholism, domestic violence, and saloon-based political corruption. Many communities introduced alcohol bans in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and enforcement of these new prohibition laws became a topic of debate. Prohibition supporters, called "drys", presented it as a battle for public morals and health. The movement was taken up by progressives in the Prohibition, Democratic, and Republican parties, and gained a national grassroots base through the Woman's Christian Temperance Union. After 1900, it was coordinated by the Anti-Saloon League. Opposition from the beer industry mobilized "wet" supporters from the wealthy Catholic and German Lutheran communities, but the influence of these groups receded from 1917 following the entry of the U.S. into the First World War against Germany.

↑ Return to Menu

Public morality in the context of LGBTQ rights in Egypt

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people in Egypt face severe challenges not experienced by non-LGBTQ residents. There are reports of widespread discrimination and violence towards openly LGBTQ people within Egypt, with police frequently prosecuting gay and transgender individuals.

Contemporary Egyptian law does not explicitly criminalize same-sex sexual acts. Instead, the state uses several morality provisions for the de facto criminalization of homosexual conduct. Any behavior, or the expression of any idea that is deemed to be immoral, scandalous or offensive to the teachings of a recognized religious leader may be prosecuted using these provisions. These public morality and public order laws have been used to target the LGBTQ community.

↑ Return to Menu