|
On November 11 2010 10:10 Romantic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:07 hefty wrote:On November 11 2010 07:37 VIB wrote:Amazon was already noticed and refuses to censor the book, and quotes free speech as it's official statement to defend it: Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. We have to remember a couple of things - our society draws a line between who is old enough to engage in sexual behavior and who isn't. It is not a natural law that a 14 yo can't enjoy/want sex with an adult Pedophilia is by definition primary\secondary attraction to prepubescent children. It is a natural law that even the children's bodies are not yet designed for sex, much less their mental state to understand consequences. Stop this pedophilia defense foolery.
Correct. But attraction doesn't necessitate action. Many men have a rape fetish and have and will never rape or hurt a woman in their lives. Pedophiles can exercise self-control and can hopefully find healthy ways to outlet their desires that would be otherwise harmful. Do they deserve to be hated by society for an attraction that is not their choice?
The problem is in the US you'd be branded a pedophile for looking at a girl as old as 16 years of age when that is clearly not the case.
|
In that case, someone should write a book for rapists. Call it Rapist's Guide to Safe Love and Nonresisting Pleasure. Anyone see the issue with logic?
|
Free speech means allowing the things you disagree with and despise to be said as well. It should be allowed to stay up imo.
|
personal note: I wanna puke
Every freedom has a limit, and it is that certain point where you attack other individuals' freedom. The only justified limit of individual freedom is where there is a higher value protects people.
This case is sth that is called "Grey Area". Where you can debate days and night, but according to the given law there is no right or wrong in this matter since judicial decisions are not made by personal conscience of judges. So, this is where judges' decision making comes into play one hundred percent.
It will be a matter of craftmanship of judges if there will be a case about this.
|
On November 11 2010 09:54 yoplate wrote:
I think this book is wrong. Free speech is good and all, and using this stuff in literature is perfectly fine with me, but this is a GUIDE to being a pedophile (without getting caught). If I made a guide for creating homemade explosives, would they sell it? It is a guide on how to commit a crime, and I believe that that is wrong.
I completely agree. You know, even an explosives book is OK; fuck, a guide to murder would even be acceptable. Just because you like pyrotechnics doesn't mean you are going to hurt anyone, and with regards to a book showing you how to murder people, a lot of that knowledge can be used for self defense or for wanting to be safe, 'just in case'. Even a book meticulously showing you how to torture people would be OK, hate on it all you want (and for the record I do hate on it) but that shit is used as standard in the military with the intention of saving lives.
But what good can come of this book? What, one day while you're on a stroll near the playground someone's going to come up to you with a gun to your head telling you that if you "don't rape a boy and rape him damn well" he's going to blow your head off? That's not going to happen, and nothing from this book can be used for anything other than harmful acts towards society and other human beings. I'm quite shocked that Amazon is selling this.
|
On November 11 2010 10:14 ddrddrddrddr wrote:
In that case, someone should write a book for rapists. Call it Rapist's Guide to Safe Love and Nonresisting Pleasure. Anyone see the issue with logic?
pedophile != rapist
That's just silly.
|
On November 11 2010 10:16 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:14 ddrddrddrddr wrote:
In that case, someone should write a book for rapists. Call it Rapist's Guide to Safe Love and Nonresisting Pleasure. Anyone see the issue with logic? pedophile != rapist That's just silly.
pedophiles who rape kids = rapist
as this author of the book claims
|
On November 11 2010 10:16 _Darwin_ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:16 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On November 11 2010 10:14 ddrddrddrddr wrote:
In that case, someone should write a book for rapists. Call it Rapist's Guide to Safe Love and Nonresisting Pleasure. Anyone see the issue with logic? pedophile != rapist That's just silly. pedophiles who rape kids = rapist as this author of the book claims
This is true. Anybody who rapes anyone is a rapist.
|
On November 11 2010 10:12 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
The problem is in the US you'd be branded a pedophile for looking at a girl as old as 16 years of age when that is clearly not the case.
Those are just stupid people who don't know what pedophile means.
|
On November 11 2010 10:17 Gorguts wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:12 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
The problem is in the US you'd be branded a pedophile for looking at a girl as old as 16 years of age when that is clearly not the case. Those are just stupid people who don't know what pedophile means.
Stupidity is strangely effective in such high numbers.
|
On November 11 2010 10:10 Romantic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:07 hefty wrote:On November 11 2010 07:37 VIB wrote:Amazon was already noticed and refuses to censor the book, and quotes free speech as it's official statement to defend it: Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. We have to remember a couple of things - our society draws a line between who is old enough to engage in sexual behavior and who isn't. It is not a natural law that a 14 yo can't enjoy/want sex with an adult Pedophilia is by definition primary\secondary attraction to prepubescent children. It is a natural law that even the children's bodies are not yet designed for sex, much less their mental state to understand consequences. Stop this pedophilia defense foolery.
Pedophilia by definition is actually NOT sex with children, thats what child molestation is.
Pedophilia is merely the sexUAL attraction to pre-pubescents which is actually quite different because you are not actually committing the act. For many of these people, it's hard for them to change the way they think and how/who they feel attracted to and it often leads them to feel incredibly guilty and ashamed of themselves because of how society hates them so extremely.
The majority of pedophiles actually don't act on their urges and merely use fantasy and imagination to carry out their needs. That or use some other form of catharsis. This is the kind of ignorance that make this book so hated; the people cannot distinguish the difference between pedophiles and child molesters.
To pedophiles, them liking children is no more different than who heterosexuals/homosexuals are attracted to. And believe it or not, many pedophiles actually DO seek out some sort of treatment.
If this book deals with how to safely and legally help them live through their lives without being demonized as the worst thing to happen to this earth,
then I'm all for it. And that support has little to do with free speech.
|
On November 11 2010 07:46 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes
I'm pretty sure you could apply that quote to this, pedophilia is against the law because it is deemed that the younger kids are not mature enough to engage in such acts with someone older than them. So you could construe this as a way of harming the person if not physically. IE freedom of speech about teaching people to do this does not apply.
Spot-on Raelcun. Justice Holmes is also the one who coined the "shouting fire in a crowded theater" example of a time when free speech can be abridged lawfully, because it would tend to cause immediate harm and has no place in political discussion, opinion speech, etc. Likewise, in this situation, the guy is basically encouraging pedophiles to go out and have sex with kids. It directly would lead to harm so a legislature could probably ban this type of material. The Holmes test also requires an imminence element though, so maybe that would be a constraining factor.
It is important to note, however, that this isn't really a free speech issue, it's a simple matter of Amazon choosing to sell the book. Just because they are Amazon doesn't mean they need to carry *every* book. I don't think this is quite the same as censorship.
|
On November 11 2010 10:21 Tensai176 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:10 Romantic wrote:On November 11 2010 10:07 hefty wrote:On November 11 2010 07:37 VIB wrote:Amazon was already noticed and refuses to censor the book, and quotes free speech as it's official statement to defend it: Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. We have to remember a couple of things - our society draws a line between who is old enough to engage in sexual behavior and who isn't. It is not a natural law that a 14 yo can't enjoy/want sex with an adult Pedophilia is by definition primary\secondary attraction to prepubescent children. It is a natural law that even the children's bodies are not yet designed for sex, much less their mental state to understand consequences. Stop this pedophilia defense foolery. Pedophilia by definition is actually NOT sex with children, thats what child molestation is. Pedophilia is merely the sexUAL attraction to pre-pubescents which is actually quite different because you are not actually committing the act. For many of these people, it's hard for them to change the way they think and how/who they feel attracted to and it often leads them to feel incredibly guilty and ashamed of themselves because of how society hates them so extremely. The majority of pedophiles actually don't act on their urges and merely use fantasy and imagination to carry out their needs. That or use some other form of catharsis. This is the kind of ignorance that make this book so hated; the people cannot distinguish the difference between pedophiles and child molesters. To pedophiles, them liking children is no more different than who heterosexuals/homosexuals are attracted to. And believe it or not, many pedophiles actually DO seek out some sort of treatment. If this book deals with how to safely and legally help them live through their lives without being demonized as the worst thing to happen to this earth, then I'm all for it. And that support has little to do with free speech.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168087¤tpage=7#140
Been discussed earlier.
|
On November 11 2010 10:21 Tensai176 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:10 Romantic wrote:On November 11 2010 10:07 hefty wrote:On November 11 2010 07:37 VIB wrote:Amazon was already noticed and refuses to censor the book, and quotes free speech as it's official statement to defend it: Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. We have to remember a couple of things - our society draws a line between who is old enough to engage in sexual behavior and who isn't. It is not a natural law that a 14 yo can't enjoy/want sex with an adult Pedophilia is by definition primary\secondary attraction to prepubescent children. It is a natural law that even the children's bodies are not yet designed for sex, much less their mental state to understand consequences. Stop this pedophilia defense foolery. This is the kind of ignorance that make this book so hated; the people cannot distinguish the difference between pedophiles and child molesters. If this book deals with how to safely and legally help them live through their lives without being demonized as the worst thing to happen to this earth, then I'm all for it. And that support has little to do with free speech.
You might want to read the samples or atleast the author's note before commenting. This book is about how to have sex with kids.
|
This is uh, interesting?..
I'd like to think it's just a joke to show how retarded the system is.Sort of like that chinese guy fooling the airport with the old man mask.
|
On November 11 2010 10:22 deathserv wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 07:46 iCCup.Raelcun wrote:
"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes
I'm pretty sure you could apply that quote to this, pedophilia is against the law because it is deemed that the younger kids are not mature enough to engage in such acts with someone older than them. So you could construe this as a way of harming the person if not physically. IE freedom of speech about teaching people to do this does not apply. Spot-on Raelcun. Justice Holmes is also the one who coined the "shouting fire in a crowded theater" example of a time when free speech can be abridged lawfully, because it would tend to cause immediate harm and has no place in political discussion, opinion speech, etc. Likewise, in this situation, the guy is basically encouraging pedophiles to go out and have sex with kids. It directly would lead to harm so a legislature could probably ban this type of material. The Holmes test also requires an imminence element though, so maybe that would be a constraining factor. It is important to note, however, that this isn't really a free speech issue, it's a simple matter of Amazon choosing to sell the book. Just because they are Amazon doesn't mean they need to carry *every* book. I don't think this is quite the same as censorship.
He's wrong, pedophilia isn't illegal. It isn't illegal to be a pedophile. A pedophile could tell a cop he was a pedophile and the cop couldn't do anything.
If we get to the point in this country that you can be arrested for what you think and feel then I'm out of here.
|
On November 11 2010 10:10 Romantic wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:07 hefty wrote:On November 11 2010 07:37 VIB wrote:Amazon was already noticed and refuses to censor the book, and quotes free speech as it's official statement to defend it: Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. We have to remember a couple of things - our society draws a line between who is old enough to engage in sexual behavior and who isn't. It is not a natural law that a 14 yo can't enjoy/want sex with an adult Pedophilia is by definition primary\secondary attraction to prepubescent children. It is a natural law that even the children's bodies are not yet designed for sex, much less their mental state to understand consequences. Stop this pedophilia defense foolery.
Our society draw the line between youth of age 14 and 15 (at least here in Denmark). That is no natural given. The notion of pedophilia being a bad thing is one I share but it doesn't mean that the lines we have chosen to draw are always correct. I don't believe in such generalizations to be correct for every single case, but a law is simply necessary to protect the innocent. Doesn't mean there isn't gray areas though. A 14 yo can certainly be as mentally and physically mature as another individual who are older. A case of a 14 yo having sex with his/her 15 yo partner is another gray area.
|
On November 11 2010 10:21 Tensai176 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:10 Romantic wrote:On November 11 2010 10:07 hefty wrote:On November 11 2010 07:37 VIB wrote:Amazon was already noticed and refuses to censor the book, and quotes free speech as it's official statement to defend it: Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. We have to remember a couple of things - our society draws a line between who is old enough to engage in sexual behavior and who isn't. It is not a natural law that a 14 yo can't enjoy/want sex with an adult Pedophilia is by definition primary\secondary attraction to prepubescent children. It is a natural law that even the children's bodies are not yet designed for sex, much less their mental state to understand consequences. Stop this pedophilia defense foolery. To pedophiles, them liking children is no more different than who heterosexuals/homosexuals are attracted to.
People with mental disorders think they are normal and try to justify their actions? Lord mercy, I never knew such a thing.
I'll grant the book passage if child molestation results in a life prison sentence with no parole.
|
I'm fairly sure this book isn't legal; there's no possible way to use the advice in the book except to rape kids, and I'm fairly sure that it's not legal to publish advice on how to commit a crime.
It's legal to publish advice on how to AVOID technically committing a crime (that shorter line is probably legal); it's legal to publish advice about something that could easily help you commit a crime(explosives handbooks) but I'm pretty sure advice on how to commit a crime flat out is not legal.
(This said, it's possible the author's managed to phrase it in a way that makes it legal in the full context of the book and if he did I agree Amazon should not censor themselves no matter what kind of crazy crap they agreed to publish. I don't see how he could've gotten out of giving advice about condoms.
Also, it is my professional opinion from a long time on the internet that the author is a troll and not necessarily an actual pedophile.)
EDIT: OH, also, PEDOPHILIA is not and cannot ever be a crime. The crime is CHILD MOLESTATION; pedophilia is only the attraction to children and you cannot criminalize a thought process in any remotely sane country.
|
On November 11 2010 10:22 Firereaver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 10:21 Tensai176 wrote:On November 11 2010 10:10 Romantic wrote:On November 11 2010 10:07 hefty wrote:On November 11 2010 07:37 VIB wrote:Amazon was already noticed and refuses to censor the book, and quotes free speech as it's official statement to defend it: Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. We have to remember a couple of things - our society draws a line between who is old enough to engage in sexual behavior and who isn't. It is not a natural law that a 14 yo can't enjoy/want sex with an adult Pedophilia is by definition primary\secondary attraction to prepubescent children. It is a natural law that even the children's bodies are not yet designed for sex, much less their mental state to understand consequences. Stop this pedophilia defense foolery. Pedophilia by definition is actually NOT sex with children, thats what child molestation is. Pedophilia is merely the sexUAL attraction to pre-pubescents which is actually quite different because you are not actually committing the act. For many of these people, it's hard for them to change the way they think and how/who they feel attracted to and it often leads them to feel incredibly guilty and ashamed of themselves because of how society hates them so extremely. The majority of pedophiles actually don't act on their urges and merely use fantasy and imagination to carry out their needs. That or use some other form of catharsis. This is the kind of ignorance that make this book so hated; the people cannot distinguish the difference between pedophiles and child molesters. To pedophiles, them liking children is no more different than who heterosexuals/homosexuals are attracted to. And believe it or not, many pedophiles actually DO seek out some sort of treatment. If this book deals with how to safely and legally help them live through their lives without being demonized as the worst thing to happen to this earth, then I'm all for it. And that support has little to do with free speech. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168087¤tpage=7#140Been discussed earlier.
Huh?
Enlighten me.
My point was that thinking, desiring, fantasizing are different things than actually committing them. Like how fantasizing about rape (Which not sure about you guys... But I have done...) is not and should never be a crime. I'm not the smartest individual so some further elucidation about how this topic was addressed in that link may be necessary...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
