Amazon Defends Pedophile Book

[penartur]

Originally Posted by boxcorner

TVs outside the US have an on/off switch, instead.

And here in Russia there is another name for TV: "zombifying box"

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by Pushka

Kenny Kenny Kenny you missed a couple of words to totally misconstrue what I said. I said "violence in a movie"
Unless the studios are now murdering people to make their movies real, then there no one is hurt.

You compared pedophilia (an actual act) to violence in a movie (a fictional act) and then pretended it was the action itself, not the reality of it, that made the difference. That's comparing apples to ... pictures of apples. Let's switch it around: is it more harmful to children to see pedophilia in a movie, or to be murdered in real life?

Inappropriate sex is very easy to define. Any sexual act that is illegal is inappropriate! Or are we going to argue the legality of the law as it currently stands.

First, there's the question "Illegal ... where?" There are sexual acts that are legal in some states in the US that are illegal in others (and yes, we're talking consenting adults here, and a government that intrudes in their bedrooms). And there are sexual acts that are legal in some countries that are illegal in others. Given that some of these jurisdictions say that if a person within their jurisdiction sees something that is legal where it was created, but illegal where the viewer is (which is, in fact, exactly what happened here) they should be able to have that person who was never in their location arrested and brought to them to be prosecuted, this is a rather important consideration.

Second, you're confusing legal and right. For example, in countries with sharia law, it's legal for the authorities to cut off the hand of a thief. Is that also right? In those countries, it is illegal for a person to choose what religion they wish to belong to. Is that, then, wrong? I'm not sure if they've sorted it out yet, but a couple of years ago, playing computer games was illegal in Greece (the intent of the law was to ban gambling, but it was net cafe owners with games like online chess who were arrested). In a remarkable number of countries, including those most of us live in, it wasn't all that long ago, historically speaking, that enslaving other human beings was perfectly legal, whereas helping a slave to escape was a crime. So slavery was right and freedom for slaves was wrong? What have you done that is a crime in Saudi Arabia, China, or even Greece?

Legal and illegal ... right and wrong ... so a picture of a sexual act between a man and a woman is appropriate, but a picture of the exact same act between two women is inappropriate? Except ten miles away, where it's appropriate again? Appropriateness is defined by one's physical location, and it all changes if you walk across an invisible line?

The law dictates what is legal -- not what is right. And those two do not always match up. I strongly suggest you read Letter from a Birmingham Jail. One has to deal with the consequences of the law, or get bad laws changed, but one should never allow the law to replace one's conscience. Turning in an escaped slave was legal and mandatory, but it was never right.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by nguirado

She said WATCHING violence. There is a point where violence has a lasting harmful effect. I'm thinking of nihilistic Faces of Death or Rob Zombie movies. I guess you're saying that X-rated movies are on that level?

Last time I checked the research status of that they could not show that watching violence had and lasting harmful effects.

[penartur]

Originally Posted by tompe

Last time I checked the research status of that they could not show that watching violence had and lasting harmful effects.

And what about watching sex?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by penartur

And what about watching sex?

or rape or torture or child molestation or....

[Worldwalker]

Couldn't that be countered by watching a few good religious films?

[AGB]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

Couldn't that be countered by watching a few good religious films?

Isn't that an oxymoron?

[Pushka]

I live in Australia where any sexual act between consenting adults is legal. That makes it easy for me to decide. Thankfully slavery was never legal here although we didn't treat the indigenous population with any respect. We have tough censorship laws here but it hasn't stopped some horrific pedophile acts. I don't think we have the right to say that something that might be seen as legal here, should also be legal in a other country. And the reverse. That is their right to determine their own legal system. We do not have the right to carry arms here for any reason unless you are a police officer. Same with knives. But do I have the right to say that law should also apply in the States? I am guessing No.

yes I was comparing apples and oranges but was following that argument from an earlier post. While some argue this was a work of fiction, it wasn't. It was a how-to guide based on a person's knowledge.

You say that just because something is law, doesn't make it right. I agree with that. Just because this book might be allowed under one of the Amendments, doesn't make it right that it is allowed. And while I am Australian, I will say, even though I have no right to say so, that if the Amendments allow such things to be freely available, ie works that describe how to commit a serious crime, then maybe that needs to change. Such books are certainly banned here.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by nguirado

What would you rather your kids watch: Gladiator or 9 1/2 weeks?

I never saw 9 1/2 weeks. How are the women portrayed in the movie?

Are they abused, forced, demeaned, or dishonored in any way?

[Pushka]

Originally Posted by AGB

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Yup. Sure is.

[Fbone]

Originally Posted by tompe

Last time I checked the research status of that they could not show that watching violence had and lasting harmful effects.

Why are movies rated if they aren't harmful?

[AGB]

Originally Posted by Fbone

Why are movies rated if they aren't harmful?

"The Moral Majority" and what was that "Mother" group called? Mothers against sex?

In any case, the idea is that certain lobby groups have, well, lobbied to make it happen, be it foul language, women's breasts, nipples, sex, violence, "offensive" words, you name it.

These days, they seem to concentrate on sex, and anything that might offend their constitutional right* to not have their religious beliefs countered.


*Yes, I know there is no such constitutional right.

[AGB]

LOL, I did a search on google on "Mothers against", hoping I could find one them referring to the eighties:

http://www.google.dk/search?ie=UTF-8...others+against

A plethora of choices, where the gist of them all is at "concerned parents" do whatever they lobby for, on behalf of the children. "Think of the children!!"

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by AGB

LOL, I did a search on google on "Mothers against", hoping I could find one them referring to the eighties:

http://www.google.dk/search?ie=UTF-8...others+against

A plethora of choices, where the gist of them all is at "concerned parents" do whatever they lobby for, on behalf of the children. "Think of the children!!"

I like this one: http://www.mapsu.org/

that behavior should be banned!

You deserve Karma for that but I'm out for the moment....

[AGB]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I like this one: http://www.mapsu.org/

that behavior should be banned!

You deserve Karma for that but I'm out for the moment....

I only sit down and pee when I'm drunk.

I can't believe they're asking me to be drunk from early morning till I hit the sack in the evening (or morning - whichever fits).

Thanks for the karma-thought. I think I have received plenty for the time being. Unless, of course, we decide to outdo Screwball's karma crusade.