Amazon Defends Pedophile Book

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by JLeighs

Now THIS is a classic straw man argument. Someone objects to someone else being able to legally publish a how-to guide for pedophiles, including condom alternatives to fit little boys who are too small for over-the-counter condoms, and your response is to ask what he has against the 1st amendment? Really?

I don't hear him suggesting that the amendment be modified; so yes, what does he have against it?

[eric11210]

Originally Posted by NVash

Teenager, child, same difference in the eyes of the law IIRC. Maybe Im beating a dead horse here but Im not getting whats being said. Lolita could be the same thing. Add a few years to the main characters love interest and tell it from the pedophiles point of view, look at that, a story that doubles as a how to guide.

I agree that it makes no practical difference, however, just for the sake of intellectual honesty in debate, it should be noted that many state laws do make a distinction if the child was under 12.

While society tends to lump those interested in teens together with those interested in younger children, there is something of a difference and many state laws do mete out harsher penalties for crimes against children under 12 (rightly so in my opinion -- while I still feel it's wrong to do, I think there is a world of difference between say a 29 year old having sex with a 16 or 17 year old kid and that same 29 year old having sex with an 8 or 9 year old kid.).

[penartur]

Originally Posted by Stitchawl

Let's try a check list. Please check off the ones you believe should be free to be published under the umbrella of Free Speech;

Child pornography.

National Defense secretes.

Truck routes for disposal of Nuclear Waste.

Secret Service Plans for protecting the President

Everyone's medical records

Well, i choose "yes" for everything except for (maybe, just maybe, because allowing it clearly and directly stimulates the production of child pornography, which is, of course, a violation) child pornography.
Also, responsible for National Defense secretes is the one who leaked it (i.e. who had a qualified access to it, and then gave it to someone without such an access), not the one who distributed it.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by darknessangel

The book has been taken offline and the guy has even been arrested. Why isn't this thread already closed? o_O

Helloooo mods!

Yes, it is now the time to cover up all tracks, so mods should remove this thread entirely and pretend it never exists. To make things better, they should also remove all users who posted in this thread.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by JLeighs

If someone asked me if I have ever raped/sexually assaulted children, my first response would be a resounding "no!". I certainly wouldn't say "could have".

And i'd say "saa " ("who knows..." in japanese) just for lulz.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by Care

As a mother, I do not want this kind of book out there. I am sorry, but when it comes down to the safety of your own children and some sicko having his rights, I choose my children's safety.

The exactly same thing could be said by some christian fanatic mother about Darwin's books.
The problem is who will decide that Darwin's books are okay, and the book in topic is not okay?

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by penartur

The exactly same thing could be said by some christian fanatic mother about Darwin's books.
The problem is who will decide that Darwin's books are okay, and the book in topic is not okay?

I'll decide. Darwin's teachings can stay and we'll Fahrenheit 451 the Bible.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

A manual on how to abuse children should never be published and anyone who tries should be locked up for life. And let the other prisoners know about the pedophile. Then if s/he is killed then all the better.

And then you should put in jail anyone who read that book (and of course let the other prisoners know about the pedophile). And then the same with anyone who defended the right to wrote such books in this thread. And then the same with anyone who read this thread but hasn't claimed their desire for the author to be put in jail and killed.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by penartur

The exactly same thing could be said by some christian fanatic mother about Darwin's books.
The problem is who will decide that Darwin's books are okay, and the book in topic is not okay?

Hey, I just noticed that your post is #666 and you used a religious analogy ...LOL ...you beast.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by Joebill

Writing a how to book on committing such a crime is not free speech. Its Evil. Its Wrong. It should be stopped.

Writing a how to book on proving that Earth spins around the Sun is not free speech. Its Evil. Its Wrong. It should be stopped.

[penartur]

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.

What do you call an "instructions"?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by JLeighs

Now THIS is a classic straw man argument. Someone objects to someone else being able to legally publish a how-to guide for pedophiles, including condom alternatives to fit little boys who are too small for over-the-counter condoms, and your response is to ask what he has against the 1st amendment? Really?

Yes, really. Your statement is a blatant attempt at misdirection.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by Pushka

I actually have Lolita on my kindle. I would not have an Instructional Guide on the best way to molest a child on my kindle.

So, actually, you just like Lolita's writing style and don't like writing style of the book in topic?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Hey, I just noticed that your post is #666 and you used a religious analogy ...LOL ...you beast.

Must be the Devil made him do it!

[penartur]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Hey, I just noticed that your post is #666 and you used a religious analogy ...LOL ...you beast.

Well, i had a reverse pentagram as my avatar for a long time (not on that forum though)
And, oh my god, i sometimes listen "true norwegian black metal"!

PS: By the way, it is an interesting idea (i mean avatar)...