Quote:
Originally Posted by Pushka
No, that argument is a red herring. Lolita is a novel.
This book is a work of non fiction. It gives facts about how to commit (better) or cover up a crime.
Whether anyone likes or dislikes such books is irrelevant. The issue is that if somone follows the instructions in this book, it will lead to a crime that in its very nature is always harmful to children. You can build a bomb but not set it off. Or you can set it off in an isolated area. So no harm done. You cannot commit paedophilia and not cause permanent damage.
|
If the author were to re-write the book as a novel or short story collection would it be legally protected speech then? If I were to write a novel that included very graphic details and specific instructions on how to kill another human being and cover up the evidence, would that be protected. Dan Simmons' Drood comes a bit close to this when it describes how one might dispose of a body in a lime pit. Does the intent of the author matter and how does one legally gauge that? What if one were to write a novel featuring a terrorist sub-plot which describes how to carry out a poison gas attack on a mall? There would be no way to use that knowledge without harming people. Should the book be banned then?