The Supreme Court's current definition of obscenity denies free-speech protection to materials or activities that

• A. Depict sexuality in a way that is degrading to its subjects.
• B. Promote violence against women or children.
• C. Lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
• D. Present a clear and present danger to community standards of decency.

Answer: (C)

The main idea is that obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment when a work fails the value prong of the Miller test. The Supreme Court asks, taken as a whole, would the work be judged by the average person using contemporary community standards to have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value? If a work lacks that serious value, and also meets the other two criteria (appeals to prurient interest and patently offensive depiction), it can be deemed obscene and lose First Amendment protection. The option stating a lack of serious value directly reflects this final criterion, making it the correct choice. The other ideas—depicting sexuality in a degrading way, promoting violence, or the 'clear and present danger' concept—reflect different legal concerns and are not the tests for obscenity.