Amazon Defends Pedophile Book

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Republic. Yes a republic.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag and the Republic for which it stands..."

Glad you stopped there.

[Andrew H.]

"Democracy" means "a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system."

Our particular federal constitutional republic is a democracy, as are all major European constitutional monarchies (although I'm not sure of the status of Vatican City). None of them are a "Pure Democracy," of course.

Although you could certainly have a federal constitutional republic or a constitutional monarch that was not a democracy, or not much of a democracy.

A state in which only people with a net worth exceeding $1 million could vote could still be a federal constitutional republic, although I would tend not to call it a democracy.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Glad you stopped there.

...one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Glad you stopped there.

Well, the next part is a bit controversial ....

Some bite their tongue at that part.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Well, the next part is a bit controversial ....

Some bite their tongue at that part.

And some of us want it removed.

[NightGeometry]

Apologies, I really didn't mean to provoke anything.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by NightGeometry

Apologies, I really didn't mean to provoke anything.

Oh no. No Apology needed or expected as far as I'm concerned. Many citizens here don't know or understand the difference.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

...one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Hey, you finished it the way it should be.

(sorry, missed your post, just now saw it)

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Hey, you finished it the way it should be.

(sorry, missed your post, just now saw it)

See, nobody ever pledges allegiance to that free speech nonsense.

[happy_terd]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_types_of_democracy

[BuddyBoy]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Murder is a worse crime than child molestation. You can live after being molested; you can't live after being killed. It's the irremediable crime. Yet it isn't a crime to fantasize about murder (if it was, most of us would be in jail, especially those who have dealt with Dell). It isn't a crime to write about murder (there are not only books but whole series in bookstores). It isn't a crime to visually depict murder (Dexter, anyone?). It's only a crime to commit murder. And that is as it should be.

Late to the party as always, but your well written explanation and telling example to me have encapsulated the power of the pure free-speech argument.

In practice, free speech will always have exceptions - in Canada they include hate speech, child pornography, and "seditious" literature. Tah - mustn't try to overthrow Her Majesty, now.

I'm not sure what the current CP standards are in Canada - at one time, fictional stories, presumed to some, however small, "artistic merit" were exempt. And although age of consent in Canada ranges from 14-16, the age of consent in exploitive relationships, including pornography and prostitution, is 18.

In many other countries, the big bug-a-boo is obscenity, seeings how it's a totally subjective standard.

[boxcorner]

Originally Posted by BuddyBoy

... "seditious" literature. Tah - mustn't try to overthrow Her Majesty, now ...

And, there was a time when being denounced as a heretic, or witch, was as good as receiving a death sentence, but times move on. There will always be ancient laws that no longer befit present-day requirements. Changes in the law often lag behind the will of the people and unpopular ones sometimes get overturned. I see threads such as this one as being an essential part of democracy, and long may it continue; it seems pretty long already.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by BuddyBoy

In practice, free speech will always have exceptions - in Canada they include hate speech, child pornography, and "seditious" literature. Tah - mustn't try to overthrow Her Majesty, now.

There was also a Free Speech in USSR during the Stalin's reign.
Of course, it had exceptions - including any negative statements about the Soviets or Communism. But in practice, free speech will always have exceptions; so i can conclude we had a really Free Speech in USSR.

[nguirado]

Originally Posted by penartur

There are numerous analogies to that in the real world. For example, there can be any amount of blood, guts and dismembered bodies in PG-13 certified movie, but if it contains a single breast (as long as it is not chicken breasts, yummy), it will be classified as unsuitable for children. I guess that nazis are considered to be even worse than woman breast.

This is an opinion that sounds right when you hear it, however, in upon deeper reflection, it's not. For those of you with young children, or even older children, what would make you feel more uncomfortable watching with your kids: Saving Private Ryan or a porno. Killing is worse than love, right?

There are three aspects here, off the top of my head:

1. For many of you, sex, like violence is bad in certain contexts (like the subject of this thread) and you want to steer your children in a certain direction.

2. Sex is usually something private between partners, not shared with the family. The idea of a family being aroused together, and that's what sex does, right, is creepy.

3. The third is to protect the innocence of children.

I don't think I have to explain this to parents, but some of you might want to consider it.

[Pushka]

I think inappropriate sex is worse than violence in a movie. And I am a parent. Pedophilia always harms its victims; watching acts of violence probably wont.