• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 16:50
CEST 22:50
KST 05:50
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
TL.net Map Contest #21: Voting10[ASL20] Ro4 Preview: Descent11Team TLMC #5: Winners Announced!3[ASL20] Ro8 Preview Pt2: Holding On9Maestros of the Game: Live Finals Preview (RO4)5
Community News
Chinese SC2 server to reopen; live all-star event in Hangzhou7Weekly Cups (Oct 13-19): Clem Goes for Four0BSL Team A vs Koreans - Sat-Sun 16:00 CET6Weekly Cups (Oct 6-12): Four star herO85.0.15 Patch Balance Hotfix (2025-10-8)80
StarCraft 2
General
RotterdaM "Serral is the GOAT, and it's not close" DreamHack Open 2013 revealed The New Patch Killed Mech! Chinese SC2 server to reopen; live all-star event in Hangzhou Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy
Tourneys
SC2's Safe House 2 - October 18 & 19 INu's Battles #13 - ByuN vs Zoun Tenacious Turtle Tussle Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament $1,200 WardiTV October (Oct 21st-31st)
Strategy
Custom Maps
Map Editor closed ?
External Content
Mutation # 496 Endless Infection Mutation # 495 Rest In Peace Mutation # 494 Unstable Environment Mutation # 493 Quick Killers
Brood War
General
Is there anyway to get a private coach? BW General Discussion The Lose More Card BSL Season 21 OGN to release AI-upscaled StarLeague from Feb 24
Tourneys
300$ 3D!Community Brood War Super Cup #4 [ASL20] Semifinal B Azhi's Colosseum - Anonymous Tournament [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
[I] Funny Protoss Builds/Strategies Current Meta Roaring Currents ASL final [I] TvZ Strategies and Builds
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Path of Exile Dawn of War IV ZeroSpace Megathread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread SPIRED by.ASL Mafia {211640}
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread The Chess Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Men's Fashion Thread
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Series you have seen recently... Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion!
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 MLB/Baseball 2023 Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
SC2 Client Relocalization [Change SC2 Language] Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
Certified Crazy
Hildegard
The Heroism of Pepe the Fro…
Peanutsc
Rocket League: Traits, Abili…
TrAiDoS
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1130 users

Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure - Page 21

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 68 Next
Hanners
Profile Joined August 2009
United States142 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-11 04:20:21
November 11 2010 04:19 GMT
#401
On November 11 2010 13:12 Deyster wrote:
People describing censorship as if it's that monster that eats through their freedom need to look at things from a different angle.

I'm pretty sure every single one of us at least practiced censorship themselves. Be it hiding their porn from their younger brothers, hiding their school marks from their parents, talking to friends/family members with a language only they understand while others don't or even hiding your "shame" when somebody catches you naked. All of those are acts of censorship on some level.

There is a greater benefit from censorship if used fairly and wisely. Kids are most of the time not ready for certain things or do not fully understand the consequences of certain actions. Censorship gives them time to be prepared.


All of your examples are examples of self-censorship, not someone else (or society as a whole) censoring you.

Your argument is invalid.
Were all mad here. Im mad. Youre mad.
Traveler
Profile Blog Joined September 2009
United States451 Posts
November 11 2010 04:21 GMT
#402
No one seems to think the author of the book is trolling us?
Can you ever argue in favor of something without first proving it?
Krigwin
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
1130 Posts
November 11 2010 04:23 GMT
#403
On November 11 2010 13:08 Falling wrote:
I'm not even sure that Franklin quote is a relevant response. Essentially Mellotron was arguing that voluntarily being less selfish or self-indulgent for the greater good, could be beneficial. Not that he would be giving up institutionalized liberty.

Institutionalized liberty allows people to have choice, but not all choices are equal. With that liberty in place, people seem to revel in the really poor choices because 'it's their freedom.' Yes it is, but it doesn't necessarily build a more positive society. The only good thing is we haven't created a restrictive society whereby one cannot even choose to do what is right (government is terrible at defining what is good and what is not). However, the ones that revel in the excesses of self-indulgence, I think, abuse their freedom and do not contribute.

Thus voluntarily giving up on those excesses has little in common with Franklin's concern.

No, his post was basically that he, personally, individually, would be fine with a certain degree of authoritarianism and the loss of a few of his civil liberties in exchange for some tangible benefit; this is both ideologically against the principles of the United States and a practically impossible and thus argumentatively worthless scenario. Rather than take the time to thoroughly explain why such a system of beliefs would be ideologically illogical, unsustainable in reality, and flawed in even just the context of this current debate, I thought it would save everyone a bit of time if I rather just posted a highly relevant quote to hopefully illustrate that better men have critically thought over such an ideal and disagreed with it.
MiniRoman
Profile Blog Joined September 2003
Canada3953 Posts
November 11 2010 04:25 GMT
#404
On November 11 2010 13:16 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:10 MiniRoman wrote:
And that offers any sort of redemption in what way? The book offers guidance on how to avoid being caught while carrying on sexual interactions with children. You seriously gonna get into potential justifications for why the sexual assault occurs?

If you want to feel powerful over a child, offer them an icecream and hold it above your head. Wow you're so powerful. feel better? No? Might as well rape them, then I'll feel in control!

Clearly rape isn't sexual.


I'm not talking about the book. I'm just saying it's ignorant to assume all pedophiles are child molesters who want to hurt children.

When did I condone raping children?


Well you chose to ignore the reality of whats being discussed to argue about words. Any sort of sexual release from viewing children is just wrong. If a pedophile gets off to anything child-pornographic related then it reinforces a system in which I'm sure somewhere a kid was hurt for that end. Is that really something acceptable? Goes against my human nature. I'll accept ignorance and hold a prejudice against pedophiles, doesn't bother me so much.

Thanks for making that distinction between child molester and pedophile though, what a big deal it was.
Nak Allstar.
Shakes
Profile Joined April 2010
Australia557 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-11 04:28:42
November 11 2010 04:27 GMT
#405
The book is still there on the link if you log out of your amazon account, it's being blocked if you log in for some reason. Hmm and now I log back in and I can see it again. Very strange.
Deyster
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Jordan579 Posts
November 11 2010 04:28 GMT
#406
On November 11 2010 13:19 Hanners wrote:

All of your examples are examples of self-censorship, not someone else (or society as a whole) censoring you.

Your argument is invalid.

What about a parent preventing explicit material from being viewed by their children? Or a parent prohibiting foul language in front of children?

Think of the community as a one big family and the authorities are the parents of this one big family. Think of those who are calling for censorship as the big brother who understands the dangers and alerts the parents to the impending dangers.

And I think everyone (Regardless if you agree with censorship or not) should ask themselves: If you were a parent, would you want to protect your children from things that could potentially ruin their life or affect it negatively?
Watch the minimap.
XeliN
Profile Joined June 2009
United Kingdom1755 Posts
November 11 2010 04:31 GMT
#407
On November 11 2010 13:16 tree.hugger wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 12:58 XeliN wrote:
On November 11 2010 12:55 So no fek wrote:
Looks like the removed it; link in the OP brings up an error page.


Sad, people may risk their safety in the name of an ideal, but a company will never risk their profits to do so...

What's the ideal here? Amazon is a business. They can sell whatever they want. They deemed it not in their company's long term interests to sell a book that many found objectionable.

The author can still write books, and can sell them independently, or through someone else if he can find a difference business willing to sell his book.

I'm so confused about where this freedom of speech argument comes in. Who's freedom of speech is being restricted?


They orignally defended their selling of the book on grounds of freedom of speech, then, presumably due to pressure and considerations of damage it might do to the company they chose to remove it.

This is what I meant by sad.
Adonai bless
Krigwin
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
1130 Posts
November 11 2010 04:32 GMT
#408
On November 11 2010 13:28 Deyster wrote:
What about a parent preventing explicit material from being viewed by their children? Or a parent prohibiting foul language in front of children?

Think of the community as a one big family and the authorities are the parents of this one big family. Think of those who are calling for censorship as the big brother who understands the dangers and alerts the parents to the impending dangers.

And I think everyone (Regardless if you agree with censorship or not) should ask themselves: If you were a parent, would you want to protect your children from things that could potentially ruin their life or affect it negatively?

Your emotionally charged rhetoric isn't convincing anyone, this is a book written for pedophiles (and apparently poorly written), not some kind of magic artifact that turns anyone within close proximity into a child molester. No matter how much you try to paint a picture of actual and imminent danger your argument will never be valid until you can somehow prove this book is inciting or directly causing harm.
DoctorHelvetica
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States15034 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-11 04:39:32
November 11 2010 04:36 GMT
#409
On November 11 2010 13:25 MiniRoman wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:16 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:10 MiniRoman wrote:
And that offers any sort of redemption in what way? The book offers guidance on how to avoid being caught while carrying on sexual interactions with children. You seriously gonna get into potential justifications for why the sexual assault occurs?

If you want to feel powerful over a child, offer them an icecream and hold it above your head. Wow you're so powerful. feel better? No? Might as well rape them, then I'll feel in control!

Clearly rape isn't sexual.


I'm not talking about the book. I'm just saying it's ignorant to assume all pedophiles are child molesters who want to hurt children.

When did I condone raping children?


Well you chose to ignore the reality of whats being discussed to argue about words. Any sort of sexual release from viewing children is just wrong. If a pedophile gets off to anything child-pornographic related then it reinforces a system in which I'm sure somewhere a kid was hurt for that end. Is that really something acceptable? Goes against my human nature. I'll accept ignorance and hold a prejudice against pedophiles, doesn't bother me so much.

Thanks for making that distinction between child molester and pedophile though, what a big deal it was.


Sorry, it's annoying when people try to brand the innocent as rapists.

It's doubly annoying when people accept willful ignorance to hate something they don't understand. Don't imply for a second you know how all pedophiles think or act.
RIP Aaliyah
Hanners
Profile Joined August 2009
United States142 Posts
November 11 2010 04:38 GMT
#410
On November 11 2010 13:28 Deyster wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:19 Hanners wrote:

All of your examples are examples of self-censorship, not someone else (or society as a whole) censoring you.

Your argument is invalid.

What about a parent preventing explicit material from being viewed by their children? Or a parent prohibiting foul language in front of children?

Think of the community as a one big family and the authorities are the parents of this one big family. Think of those who are calling for censorship as the big brother who understands the dangers and alerts the parents to the impending dangers.

And I think everyone (Regardless if you agree with censorship or not) should ask themselves: If you were a parent, would you want to protect your children from things that could potentially ruin their life or affect it negatively?


There's a reason the term "big brother" was coined in the US and why it's negative.

If I was a parent, of course I would want to protect my children to the best of my abilities. However, I'm not going to allow the government (or whatever society) to act as *my* parent.

In short: You don't get to tell me how I can live my life. If I get orgasms looking at people's feet, you have no right to tell me I can't look at feet. If I chose to hang a consenting partner from the ceiling, smear shit on them, cut them, and "force" them to give me oral pleasure, you have no right to say that I can't do that. They don't effect you or anyone else.

The moment that consent is not given or harm is done, then you can judge me. You don't have the right to not be offended.

Until then, kindly stop trying to keep me from living my life the way I see fit.
Were all mad here. Im mad. Youre mad.
Deyster
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Jordan579 Posts
November 11 2010 04:42 GMT
#411
On November 11 2010 13:32 Krigwin wrote:
Your emotionally charged rhetoric isn't convincing anyone, this is a book written for pedophiles (and apparently poorly written), not some kind of magic artifact that turns anyone within close proximity into a child molester. No matter how much you try to paint a picture of actual and imminent danger your argument will never be valid until you can somehow prove this book is inciting or directly causing harm.


Probably my lack of knowledge of the book's actual content won't allow me to provide some actual evidence that this book is dangerous or not. But how-to/tips for avoiding getting caught or how to seduce children are considered dangerous cause of their affect on others.

For example, why wouldn't the US (and it's allies) want other countries to have nuclear knowledge? It's because with that knowledge they can make weapons and ultimately harm others.

Again, I don't know the actual content of the book, but if it will eventually lead to harming of others, I'm all in for censoring it.
Watch the minimap.
.Carnage
Profile Joined August 2010
United States99 Posts
November 11 2010 04:43 GMT
#412
This is a book that instructs a way to rape children without getting caught, which is 100% unquestionably ILLEGAL and a punishable offense. This book is the same as a book on how to commit a murder or make a mail bomb. I am personally not going to buy anything off of Amazon or a Kindle or support anyone they sponsor until this horse shit is removed.
He's just not the fastest zergling in the control group. -DayJ
Shakes
Profile Joined April 2010
Australia557 Posts
November 11 2010 04:44 GMT
#413
On November 11 2010 13:38 Hanners wrote:
There's a reason the term "big brother" was coined in the US and why it's negative.


I think you'll find George Orwell was English, not American.
Deyster
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Jordan579 Posts
November 11 2010 04:48 GMT
#414
On November 11 2010 13:38 Hanners wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:28 Deyster wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:19 Hanners wrote:

All of your examples are examples of self-censorship, not someone else (or society as a whole) censoring you.

Your argument is invalid.

What about a parent preventing explicit material from being viewed by their children? Or a parent prohibiting foul language in front of children?

Think of the community as a one big family and the authorities are the parents of this one big family. Think of those who are calling for censorship as the big brother who understands the dangers and alerts the parents to the impending dangers.

And I think everyone (Regardless if you agree with censorship or not) should ask themselves: If you were a parent, would you want to protect your children from things that could potentially ruin their life or affect it negatively?


There's a reason the term "big brother" was coined in the US and why it's negative.

If I was a parent, of course I would want to protect my children to the best of my abilities. However, I'm not going to allow the government (or whatever society) to act as *my* parent.

In short: You don't get to tell me how I can live my life. If I get orgasms looking at people's feet, you have no right to tell me I can't look at feet. If I chose to hang a consenting partner from the ceiling, smear shit on them, cut them, and "force" them to give me oral pleasure, you have no right to say that I can't do that. They don't effect you or anyone else.

The moment that consent is not given or harm is done, then you can judge me. You don't have the right to not be offended.

Until then, kindly stop trying to keep me from living my life the way I see fit.


Something I learnt from elementary school was: "Your freedom ends where others' freedoms start". As in, you're free to do whatever you want, as long as it's not invading others' freedom.

I really wouldn't give a damn if someone gets off on tentacle hentai, or 2girls1cup or whatever fucked up shit I don't know about yet. It's THEIR fantasies, their mentality and their fucked up shit. As long as it's not affecting my own freedom and my own rights, I don't see the harm.

But once one starts invading my (or others) freedom and rights, he/she should be stopped immediately and also punished.
Watch the minimap.
tree.hugger
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
November 11 2010 04:50 GMT
#415
On November 11 2010 13:31 XeliN wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:16 tree.hugger wrote:
On November 11 2010 12:58 XeliN wrote:
On November 11 2010 12:55 So no fek wrote:
Looks like the removed it; link in the OP brings up an error page.


Sad, people may risk their safety in the name of an ideal, but a company will never risk their profits to do so...

What's the ideal here? Amazon is a business. They can sell whatever they want. They deemed it not in their company's long term interests to sell a book that many found objectionable.

The author can still write books, and can sell them independently, or through someone else if he can find a difference business willing to sell his book.

I'm so confused about where this freedom of speech argument comes in. Who's freedom of speech is being restricted?


They orignally defended their selling of the book on grounds of freedom of speech, then, presumably due to pressure and considerations of damage it might do to the company they chose to remove it.

This is what I meant by sad.

Their original defense made no sense, precisely because they weren't defending the author's freedom of speech, they were simply defending their decision to sell it.

I'm really having a hard time figuring out what people are finding objectionable about the decision to pull the book.
ModeratorEffOrt, Snow, GuMiho, and Team Liquid
XeliN
Profile Joined June 2009
United Kingdom1755 Posts
November 11 2010 04:52 GMT
#416
I find nothing objectionable about it beyond that they originally argued in favour of being able to do so.

What I find most objectionable is people suggesting they ought not be allowed the descision to sell the book in the first place.
Adonai bless
Hanners
Profile Joined August 2009
United States142 Posts
November 11 2010 04:53 GMT
#417
On November 11 2010 13:48 Deyster wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:38 Hanners wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:28 Deyster wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:19 Hanners wrote:

All of your examples are examples of self-censorship, not someone else (or society as a whole) censoring you.

Your argument is invalid.

What about a parent preventing explicit material from being viewed by their children? Or a parent prohibiting foul language in front of children?

Think of the community as a one big family and the authorities are the parents of this one big family. Think of those who are calling for censorship as the big brother who understands the dangers and alerts the parents to the impending dangers.

And I think everyone (Regardless if you agree with censorship or not) should ask themselves: If you were a parent, would you want to protect your children from things that could potentially ruin their life or affect it negatively?


There's a reason the term "big brother" was coined in the US and why it's negative.

If I was a parent, of course I would want to protect my children to the best of my abilities. However, I'm not going to allow the government (or whatever society) to act as *my* parent.

In short: You don't get to tell me how I can live my life. If I get orgasms looking at people's feet, you have no right to tell me I can't look at feet. If I chose to hang a consenting partner from the ceiling, smear shit on them, cut them, and "force" them to give me oral pleasure, you have no right to say that I can't do that. They don't effect you or anyone else.

The moment that consent is not given or harm is done, then you can judge me. You don't have the right to not be offended.

Until then, kindly stop trying to keep me from living my life the way I see fit.


Something I learnt from elementary school was: "Your freedom ends where others' freedoms start". As in, you're free to do whatever you want, as long as it's not invading others' freedom.

I really wouldn't give a damn if someone gets off on tentacle hentai, or 2girls1cup or whatever fucked up shit I don't know about yet. It's THEIR fantasies, their mentality and their fucked up shit. As long as it's not affecting my own freedom and my own rights, I don't see the harm.

But once one starts invading my (or others) freedom and rights, he/she should be stopped immediately and also punished.


I agree. So how does reading a book invade a person's freedom or rights again?
Were all mad here. Im mad. Youre mad.
Djzapz
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Canada10681 Posts
November 11 2010 04:56 GMT
#418
4chan ftw
"My incompetence with power tools had been increasing exponentially over the course of 20 years spent inhaling experimental oven cleaners"
Yorke
Profile Joined November 2010
England881 Posts
November 11 2010 04:57 GMT
#419
On November 11 2010 13:48 Deyster wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:38 Hanners wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:28 Deyster wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:19 Hanners wrote:

All of your examples are examples of self-censorship, not someone else (or society as a whole) censoring you.

Your argument is invalid.

What about a parent preventing explicit material from being viewed by their children? Or a parent prohibiting foul language in front of children?

Think of the community as a one big family and the authorities are the parents of this one big family. Think of those who are calling for censorship as the big brother who understands the dangers and alerts the parents to the impending dangers.

And I think everyone (Regardless if you agree with censorship or not) should ask themselves: If you were a parent, would you want to protect your children from things that could potentially ruin their life or affect it negatively?


There's a reason the term "big brother" was coined in the US and why it's negative.

If I was a parent, of course I would want to protect my children to the best of my abilities. However, I'm not going to allow the government (or whatever society) to act as *my* parent.

In short: You don't get to tell me how I can live my life. If I get orgasms looking at people's feet, you have no right to tell me I can't look at feet. If I chose to hang a consenting partner from the ceiling, smear shit on them, cut them, and "force" them to give me oral pleasure, you have no right to say that I can't do that. They don't effect you or anyone else.

The moment that consent is not given or harm is done, then you can judge me. You don't have the right to not be offended.

Until then, kindly stop trying to keep me from living my life the way I see fit.


Something I learnt from elementary school was: "Your freedom ends where others' freedoms start". As in, you're free to do whatever you want, as long as it's not invading others' freedom.

I really wouldn't give a damn if someone gets off on tentacle hentai, or 2girls1cup or whatever fucked up shit I don't know about yet. It's THEIR fantasies, their mentality and their fucked up shit. As long as it's not affecting my own freedom and my own rights, I don't see the harm.

But once one starts invading my (or others) freedom and rights, he/she should be stopped immediately and also punished.

A book is not invading your privacy.
@YorkeSC - RIP MIT Police Officer Sean Collier, BW fan
Deyster
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
Jordan579 Posts
November 11 2010 04:58 GMT
#420
On November 11 2010 13:53 Hanners wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 11 2010 13:48 Deyster wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:38 Hanners wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:28 Deyster wrote:
On November 11 2010 13:19 Hanners wrote:

All of your examples are examples of self-censorship, not someone else (or society as a whole) censoring you.

Your argument is invalid.

What about a parent preventing explicit material from being viewed by their children? Or a parent prohibiting foul language in front of children?

Think of the community as a one big family and the authorities are the parents of this one big family. Think of those who are calling for censorship as the big brother who understands the dangers and alerts the parents to the impending dangers.

And I think everyone (Regardless if you agree with censorship or not) should ask themselves: If you were a parent, would you want to protect your children from things that could potentially ruin their life or affect it negatively?


There's a reason the term "big brother" was coined in the US and why it's negative.

If I was a parent, of course I would want to protect my children to the best of my abilities. However, I'm not going to allow the government (or whatever society) to act as *my* parent.

In short: You don't get to tell me how I can live my life. If I get orgasms looking at people's feet, you have no right to tell me I can't look at feet. If I chose to hang a consenting partner from the ceiling, smear shit on them, cut them, and "force" them to give me oral pleasure, you have no right to say that I can't do that. They don't effect you or anyone else.

The moment that consent is not given or harm is done, then you can judge me. You don't have the right to not be offended.

Until then, kindly stop trying to keep me from living my life the way I see fit.


Something I learnt from elementary school was: "Your freedom ends where others' freedoms start". As in, you're free to do whatever you want, as long as it's not invading others' freedom.

I really wouldn't give a damn if someone gets off on tentacle hentai, or 2girls1cup or whatever fucked up shit I don't know about yet. It's THEIR fantasies, their mentality and their fucked up shit. As long as it's not affecting my own freedom and my own rights, I don't see the harm.

But once one starts invading my (or others) freedom and rights, he/she should be stopped immediately and also punished.


I agree. So how does reading a book invade a person's freedom or rights again?

The knowledge within the book and what you can do with it is what's the problem.
Like I said, nuclear knowledge. With it you can produce nuclear weapons and harm others. While the knowledge itself is not harmful, but what you can do with it is, thus the nuclear knowledge is heavily censored.
Watch the minimap.
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 68 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 3h 11m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Clem_sc2 891
UpATreeSC 101
JuggernautJason56
Railgan 34
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 15735
Shuttle 456
EffOrt 431
Dewaltoss 106
Aegong 25
scan(afreeca) 17
NaDa 13
Dota 2
monkeys_forever175
Counter-Strike
fl0m1116
pashabiceps576
Stewie2K247
Foxcn90
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu484
Other Games
Grubby2820
FrodaN1351
ScreaM1095
B2W.Neo760
Skadoodle185
Pyrionflax137
KnowMe131
C9.Mang0123
ArmadaUGS89
Trikslyr69
QueenE41
Organizations
Counter-Strike
PGL293
Other Games
BasetradeTV44
StarCraft 2
angryscii 27
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Adnapsc2 12
• davetesta8
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota255
League of Legends
• TFBlade945
Other Games
• imaqtpie1363
• Shiphtur204
Upcoming Events
PiGosaur Monday
3h 11m
Replay Cast
13h 11m
OSC
19h 11m
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
1d 2h
The PondCast
1d 13h
OSC
1d 15h
WardiTV Invitational
2 days
Online Event
2 days
RSL Revival
3 days
RSL Revival
3 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
3 days
Afreeca Starleague
4 days
Snow vs Soma
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
4 days
CrankTV Team League
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Wardi Open
5 days
CrankTV Team League
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
WardiTV Invitational
6 days
CrankTV Team League
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #4 - TS2
WardiTV TLMC #15
HCC Europe

Ongoing

BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
C-Race Season 1
IPSL Winter 2025-26
EC S1
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual

Upcoming

SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
BSL 21 Non-Korean Championship
RSL Offline Finals
RSL Revival: Season 3
Stellar Fest
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
CranK Gathers Season 2: SC II Pro Teams
eXTREMESLAND 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.