Abstract
A discussion of morality in pornography among feminists is the main theme in this piece. Important in this understanding of a feminist approach to pornography is a broad appreciation for the way in which one of the antipornography feminists, Catherine MacKinnnon, has chosen to support the illegalization of pornography. Catherine MacKinnon worked with Andrea Dworkin, arguing that pornography is detrimental to women’s lives, while Carole Vance and a number of other feminists have argued otherwise. These arguments took place in the 1980s, but they are nonetheless of great significance today.

In Catharine MacKinnon’s essay “Pornography: On Morality and Politics,” she outlines the feminist theoretical debate about whether pornography is oppressive or liberating for women. MacKinnon, in support of the concept that pornography is the physical expression of conceptual obscenity, targets other feminists in an effort to make pornography illegal. The intention of MacKinnon’s article is to prove that pornography is patriarchal and that it oppresses women; however, the flaws that exist in her argument create very narrow definitions of pornography. As such, MacKinnon’s arguments ignore the pornography that is outside the narrow genre which she describes.

It is necessary to understand the historical context of the feminist “sex wars” in order to situate the article within the other views of pornography. Looking at where the article is situated within the overall debate of the morality of pornography from a feminist stand-point provides us with an idea about where her arguments come from, and why the debate continues to be relevant today.

Abstract
Since the debut of Computerized Tomography in 1972, great improvements have transpired to create high resolution images coupled with a fast scan time, thus enhancing both the diagnostic capability of the technology and patient comfort. Despite these advancements, the quantity of ionizing radiation emitted from the CT procedure, while reduced per picture, has not been sufficiently mitigated. As a result, CT scans continue to confer an increased lifetime risk of cancer to the individual, frequently without their knowledge. Courtney’s Law establishes guidelines to better inform patients of the risks and benefits of CT scans, empowering the patient to play an active role in his or her own health.

Introduction
Today, CT scans expose patients to radiation comparable to the lower ranges in Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors.1,2 Statistically, one in one thousand individuals will develop cancer as a direct consequence of CT radiation.3

The CT4 scan ushered in a new era of diagnostic medicine in 1972. Since its debut, medicine has seen great improvements in high-resolution images, fast scan time, diagnostic capability and patient comfort. Despite these advancements, the quantity of ionizing radiation emitted from the CT procedure, while reduced per picture, continues to pose a danger: CT scans confer an increased lifetime risk of cancer. Due to a lack of awareness on the part of the prescribing and administering doctors, patients frequently have no knowledge of the hazard. Patients should be aware of these radiogenic risks.

Now, perhaps more than ever before, the need for open and honest discussions about the pressing issues of our time is of great political, social, and cultural imperative. This easy to navigate electronic scholarly forum should extend the bounds of the Journal, and open up new avenues of discussion with students and faculty from around the nation.

Indeed, we truly all live in an extraordinary age of technology! So without any further delay, it is with great pride that I present to you the first electronic edition of the Public Affairs Journal.