EPTPedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure - Page 56
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
| ||
|
Night[Mare
Mexico4793 Posts
On November 11 2010 08:07 So no fek wrote: An an American, I absolutely 100% support their right to sell this book. However, I don't believe in selective speech; I'll take the good, with the bad, with the downright disgusting. i believe freedom of speech has its limits. You cant just speak your mind without backing your word and accept the responsabilities. This book is POTENTIALLY able to make people go rape children. It's gross to let this "speech" out in the open where its going to do more harm than good. | ||
|
O.Golden_ne
Australia204 Posts
On November 11 2010 07:41 kataa wrote: In previous threads I've spent alot of time defending free speech. However, in this case it's pretty inexcusable. Pedophilia is a crime in western society, and a book on how to execute it no more should be legal than a book on how to make a very nice nail bomb. The book shouldn't be banned because of it's offensive content, Lolita is a perfectly fine novel. However, if the book does directly instruct people in how to commit a crime, then it should be banned. I've seen books on "Bong Etiquette" and other cannabis related subjects. Marijuana is illegal, but there are books on it? Would you say that books should be banned on the level of 'seriousness' of the crime? | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
On December 21 2010 12:59 O.Golden_ne wrote: I've seen books on "Bong Etiquette" and other cannabis related subjects. Marijuana is illegal, but there are books on it? Would you say that books should be banned on the level of 'seriousness' of the crime? lol your argument is self defeating, try using something like books that teach people how to murder if you're actually gonna go down that route. | ||
|
DragonDefonce
United States790 Posts
On December 21 2010 12:59 O.Golden_ne wrote: I've seen books on "Bong Etiquette" and other cannabis related subjects. Marijuana is illegal, but there are books on it? Would you say that books should be banned on the level of 'seriousness' of the crime? If the anarchist's cookbook can be published and sold, I don't see why this book can't. | ||
|
mud123
27 Posts
| ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:05 HeavOnEarth wrote: lol your argument is self defeating, try using something like books that teach people how to murder if you're actually gonna go down that route. Huh? The whole point of the argument is how do you subjectively draw the line on banning materials that educate people on committing crimes. There's no real way to say that it's ok to write books on how to grow/smoke/sell pot but not ok to sell books on how to be a pedophile. | ||
|
IronInko
United States19 Posts
| ||
|
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:10 IronInko wrote: I want to say that I have no problem with the book, and I really don't. I have a problem with the fact that a book on (as I understand it) how to get away with being a pedophile is legal in a country where being a pedophile isn't. If this book were about how to safely commit murder, there would be no debate at all. It's not that I disagree with free speech or have anything against pedophilia, it's specifically that the allowance of the book is an absurd double standard. There are lots of books on how to commit murder.... | ||
|
GQz
Australia168 Posts
But eh, to add another side to this argument: Pedophiles, like it or not, can function fully legally in today's society. It is not a crime to love children, but it is a crime to be in possession of or support child pornography (or, obviously, commit a sexual act with a minor). As long as a pedophile keeps his thoughts in his head and his desires private, I see no legal reason we can prosecute him for it. In the same sense, it would only be natural for someone to publish a book about it, keeping pedophiles in check, as well as sharing their experiences. Of course, it would depend on the book's content (and from what I see, it goes on towards the lewder side, suggesting that some crimes be committed in certain ways? not too clear on the excerpts yet) but I don't see any child pornography so it's a bit of a gray area for me. I do believe in freedom of speech, however the law, as well as internet censorship has a somewhat different view. Afterall, laws are only a reflection of our code of ethics as a society, so again, it becomes somewhat of a gray area. Personally, however, I believe we should be able to write what we wish. | ||
|
IronInko
United States19 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:11 Myles wrote: There are lots of books on how to commit murder.... I'd ask for examples, but that is completely irrelevant. That's like saying that people kill each other all the time so we may as well make murder legal. Explaining that the laws are already broken or citing precedent for things being wrong doesn't excuse the fact that laws are broken or things are wrong. I explained my beliefs and citing how they don't exist in reality isn't going to affect them. | ||
|
fidey
United States46 Posts
| ||
|
Chronald
United States619 Posts
On November 11 2010 07:48 Manifesto7 wrote: Since they already publish the names, photos, and addresses of convicted sex offenders, just extend that to publish the names and places of people who buy this book. It is like publishing a book saying, "Here is exactly how to make a bomb." and then keeping track of who buys it. Oh wait, we already do that... | ||
|
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:16 IronInko wrote: I'd ask for examples, but that is completely irrelevant. That's like saying that people kill each other all the time so we may as well make murder legal. Explaining that the laws are already broken or citing precedent for things being wrong doesn't excuse the fact that laws are broken or things are wrong. I explained my beliefs and citing how they don't exist in reality isn't going to affect them. If that's your opinion that that's cool, but the way you said it made me think it was your view on how society in general would accept it. I was just stating that society has already said it is ok to have books such as 'The Anarchist Cookbook' or 'Murder, Inc' both of which promote very serious crimes. IMO, protecting all forms of speech on even the most heinous acts makes it possible to have free speech on the more controversial laws. It's a very slippery slope to ban education manuals on crimes subjectively decided to be the worst. Anything can be educational, so all it would do is force instruction manuals to become story books that convey all the same knowledge without the obvious promotion of the crime. And of course at what point does a crime become severe enough to warrant banning materials on it? | ||
|
SpicyCrab
402 Posts
Jeez people, Amazon is a business and they can sell WHATEVER THEY WISH. This is not an issue of government censorship at all. now if Amazon decided that public backlash was going to be severe, and they didn't want to deal with it, and they thought it was going to affect their bottom line, then they can stop selling it. That's all that happened. Not a freedom of speech issue, sorry. | ||
|
Bonkarooni
United States383 Posts
On November 11 2010 07:41 kataa wrote: In previous threads I've spent alot of time defending free speech. However, in this case it's pretty inexcusable. Pedophilia is a crime in western society, and a book on how to execute it no more should be legal than a book on how to make a very nice nail bomb. The book shouldn't be banned because of it's offensive content, Lolita is a perfectly fine novel. However, if the book does directly instruct people in how to commit a crime, then it should be banned. So you wouldn't argue that games that involve stealing and murder "Instruct" people on how to steal and kill?. I mean some games get pretty specific on how to work firearms, trying to make things as real as possible. | ||
|
Bonkarooni
United States383 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:07 mud123 wrote: Freedom of speech needs to be protected. However if he is describing sex acts with minors that is a crime. Just like you cant draw a cartoon of children engaged in sex acts. so this isn't about freedom of speech. this is obscenity. There are plenty of novels out there that depict sex with minors. Just to name one VERY famous novel..A Game of Thrones. | ||
|
Bonkarooni
United States383 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:16 IronInko wrote: I'd ask for examples, but that is completely irrelevant. That's like saying that people kill each other all the time so we may as well make murder legal. Explaining that the laws are already broken or citing precedent for things being wrong doesn't excuse the fact that laws are broken or things are wrong. I explained my beliefs and citing how they don't exist in reality isn't going to affect them. I'm assuming you play sc2 because you are on this form. That game is actually ALL about killing. You drop nukes for gods sake. How can you make the argument that writing a book about murder is wrong, but playing a game about murder isn't? User was warned for this post | ||
|
anTi_
United States499 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:37 Bonkarooni wrote: I'm assuming you play sc2 because you are on this form. That game is actually ALL about killing. You drop nukes for gods sake. How can you make the argument that writing a book about murder is wrong, but playing a game about murder isn't? brb getting my psyblades to gut the neighbor. | ||
|
IronInko
United States19 Posts
On December 21 2010 13:37 Bonkarooni wrote: I'm assuming you play sc2 because you are on this form. That game is actually ALL about killing. You drop nukes for gods sake. How can you make the argument that writing a book about murder is wrong, but playing a game about murder isn't? I think you're missing something critical. I didn't say that I'm against books about murder or books about pedophilia. I'm against banning something, but not banning the instruction manual to it. I've got no problem with the subjects at all, it's more that it comes off as a double standard to me. It seems inherent to me that if someone were to ban pedophilia, they'd ban what is essentially an instruction manual to it. Reference of a subject is never bad. It's that you are saying you can't do something and then supplying all the tools to do it. Really, I'm happy that free speech is strong enough to allow books that instruct things that would be illegal if you were to follow said instructions. Even so, that doesn't make it coherent to me. It really comes down to a semantic argument of free speech vs the difference in instructing vs acting. I can't really explain why I fall into the category that sees the two as near synonymous, so I'll post again when I collect my thoughts. Edit: I've come to a conclusion, being that the book being banned would be meaningless. Ultimately, as previously stated, the instruction manuals would become stories that carry the exact same meaning. The people that would use it for the purpose banned would still be able to, and you can't invade what is only essentially an instruction manual. Ultimately it's better to preserve free speech than to futilely chase after the prevention of an offense, when said offense is most likely to happen because of an individual rather than a resource and the chase itself would be a blow to society. | ||
| ||
