F
freethinker83
Guest
And Joshua was essentially a genocidal warlord. What exactly do those particular stories encourage?
Sorry, you kind of started a new subject so I couldn’t let you have the last word.
- Status
Sorry, you kind of started a new subject so I couldn’t let you have the last word.
C
Charlotte408
Guest
Good. Thank God. So, he sold a book and they arrested him, didn’t Amazon sell 4,000 copies or so? shouldn’t they be fined or penalized as well?
M
Mumbles140
Guest
Precisely another example of ‘perversion’ of a text. Nothing in the Bible commands someone to go out and kill abortionists and get away with it. You aren’t even trying to argue against my point, you are solely giving more examples to what I said falls under protected speech.
J
JimG
Guest
I have no idea what is in the book and whether or not it is obscene. There are plenty of examples of obscene material, at least in my opinion, available at bookstores everywhere. And if the First Amendment is intended to protect speech, whether written or spoken, it must protect the most repulsive speech; non-offensive speech needs little protection.
Probably the outraged reaction from Amazon’s own customers provided a better outcome than will this police action. I just find prosecution of book publishing to be a bad precedent.
Probably the outraged reaction from Amazon’s own customers provided a better outcome than will this police action. I just find prosecution of book publishing to be a bad precedent.
F
freethinker83
Guest
I’m glad that someone else agrees that freedom of speech is extremely important. Why aren’t the other members attacking you for your “defense of pedophiles” like they did to me? I’m guessing it’s because you are Catholic and I am not.
D
DawnInTexas
Guest
Two peas in a pod.
M
Mumbles140
Guest
I can’t speak for others, but as for myself, I was reading in bed, so this is the first I’ve seen of the thread this morning. But I’ll respond to JimG’s argument the same way I did to yours. Freedom of speech is absolutely important - vital for the protection of citizens. However, it is not unlimited because it does have to balance against other rights given to citizens. As soon as it begins to infringe upon those rights, then it becomes limited. Do either of you accept this statement? If not, the debate ends and you are now creating your own law rather than the established precedent of the SCOTUS.
But if you do accept that statement, then we have to determine what is considered infringing upon someone else’s rights. I’ve already talked about how freedom of religion can limit free speech when it comes to displaying religious symbols on public property - this even included white memorial crosses on a highway for victims of car accidents in Utah I believe (recent case). The same applies for words that incite or promote violence. I, for one, believe that a ‘rape a child and get away with it’ manual falls under the category of inciting/promoting violence.
H
Holly3278
Guest
If the authorities thought that he was a criminal then they apparently had reason to think that. I doubt that the authorities conspired to have him arrested simply because he had a “guide to pedophilia” book (which I think is absolutely sickening and revolting by the way) published.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I don’t have inside knowledge on this but in I am pretty certain that the authorities have to have “probable cause” in order to arrest someone. Apparently they did have “probable cause” or they wouldn’t have arrested this person. Who knows? He may have been involved in more serious crimes. I don’t know. I do not wish to make a judgment on that matter. All I know is that the authorities surely had a reason to do what they did and I see no reason to judge them. Also note that I am not accusing anyone on here of judging anyone either.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I don’t have inside knowledge on this but in I am pretty certain that the authorities have to have “probable cause” in order to arrest someone. Apparently they did have “probable cause” or they wouldn’t have arrested this person. Who knows? He may have been involved in more serious crimes. I don’t know. I do not wish to make a judgment on that matter. All I know is that the authorities surely had a reason to do what they did and I see no reason to judge them. Also note that I am not accusing anyone on here of judging anyone either.
F
freethinker83
Guest
The difference in regards to religion is who the property owner is. I do not support religious symbols of any kind on public property. I couldn’t care less about private property as the private citizen is protected by freedom of speech and religion. I don’t care if a church puts the biggest three wise men in the world on their property-It is their right. When a city government does the same thing it is a different story.
How do you feel about books like “The Anarchist’s Cookbook?” It is legal and gives instructions on how to make bombs. Although I think the book could be very dangerous in the wrong hands I’m not about to limit anyone’s right to read, publish, or write it.
F
freethinker83
Guest
M
Mumbles140
Guest
In regards to the anarchist cook book, I think it is awful, but support the right of it to be printed. It shows how to make bombs from household object, but it doesn’t tell you how to use the bombs and get away with it. This is the closest you’ve come to breaching the threshold, but it still doesn’t meet the requirements to lose protection. Greaves’ book is literally an instruction manual to rape a young child and get away with it. If the cook book wants to show somehow how to modify a handgun to make it semi- or fully automatic, I may disagree but they have that right. But when they tell someone how to go out and murder a person and get away with it, that loses protection.
M
Mumbles140
Guest
F
freethinker83
Guest
I think we’re just going to have to agree to disagree as we have different definitions of free speech and we could talk in circles for eternity. I appreciate that you didn’t accuse me of supporting child molesters like someone else did. At least you can see that I understand the difference between speech and acts.
B
Barbkw
Guest
Good point. Even Catholicism has its share of village idiots.
M
Mumbles140
Guest
Thank you. I quite clearly understand your support is for free speech, just as you support the right of the KKK, terrorists, etc to preach hate messages even though you may not agree with them. The trouble in a matter like this is that sensationalism can overrun arguments - people see themselves as battling a child molester (in this case, the author) and see those in opposition as supporting the molester, when in actuality, they are only supporting the right to free speech (as they see it defined).
And since neither of us (well, at least I’m not and you never mentioned it) are constitutional lawyers or federal judges, I think agreeing to disagree is best on the matter, and let the courts decide where free speech falls in this case.
L
limabeanerson
Guest
I’m jumping in the “debate” a bit late but here it goes…
Every book/example free thinker has brought up has legal uses. There are times when someone can legally shoot guns, make liquor, even construct bombs (though I’d say quite rare). There is never an example where it is okay to have sex with a small child. If you can give me an example where it is legal to do this in America under current laws I will consider it.
That being said, I doubt any of us have (or ever will) read the book. It is possible that it was written in a way that should be protected. As others have said, it is the speech that is most offensive that needs protecting. If we (America) starts walking down the road of limiting what can be written just because it is offensive (and there is nothing more offensive than child abuse IMO) than it could, in time, limit other things including Catholic writings as they could offend someone. It has happened in the past in other places in the world.
IMO this situation is where a good old fashioned lynch mob comes in. The police happen to be “busy” “investigating” something else while the rest of the community just takes care of business and there happens to be no witnesses. I’m just kidding (for legal reasons, lol)
Every book/example free thinker has brought up has legal uses. There are times when someone can legally shoot guns, make liquor, even construct bombs (though I’d say quite rare). There is never an example where it is okay to have sex with a small child. If you can give me an example where it is legal to do this in America under current laws I will consider it.
That being said, I doubt any of us have (or ever will) read the book. It is possible that it was written in a way that should be protected. As others have said, it is the speech that is most offensive that needs protecting. If we (America) starts walking down the road of limiting what can be written just because it is offensive (and there is nothing more offensive than child abuse IMO) than it could, in time, limit other things including Catholic writings as they could offend someone. It has happened in the past in other places in the world.
IMO this situation is where a good old fashioned lynch mob comes in. The police happen to be “busy” “investigating” something else while the rest of the community just takes care of business and there happens to be no witnesses. I’m just kidding (for legal reasons, lol)
F
freethinker83
Guest
I should add the I fully support the rights of everyone who disagrees with this author to write him letters telling him so.
And no, I am definitely not a lawyer or judge either. I had a constitutional law class in college, but the memories of it are growing fuzzier with each passing day.
Thank you for having a civil conversation with me, and I hope you enjoy the holidays with your loved ones.
J
JimG
Guest
I’m not sure from what I’ve read so far what the charges will be against this person. Is he being criminally charged for writing the book, or for selling the book, or for sending it through the postal system? If the book itself constitutes child porn, it may be illegal to distribute.
At what point did he violate the law? By thinking such thoughts? By writing them down and then keeping the writings? By offering the book for sale? By sending it through the mail?
If it is child porn, did Amazon violate the law by agreeing to advertise it and distribute it? Did the law enforcement officer violate the law by receiving it?
When it comes to freedom of speech, I think caution should be used.
In the future, it may be illegal for a Catholic to publish a book advocating against homosexual behavior, since it might be deemed ‘hate speech’ which could end in violence.
And I think that in cases like this, public moral outrage is likely a better deterrent than the law. But not having any knowledge of the material at hand, it’s difficult to know how a court would decide on a case where freedom of speech is part of the issue.
At what point did he violate the law? By thinking such thoughts? By writing them down and then keeping the writings? By offering the book for sale? By sending it through the mail?
If it is child porn, did Amazon violate the law by agreeing to advertise it and distribute it? Did the law enforcement officer violate the law by receiving it?
When it comes to freedom of speech, I think caution should be used.
In the future, it may be illegal for a Catholic to publish a book advocating against homosexual behavior, since it might be deemed ‘hate speech’ which could end in violence.
And I think that in cases like this, public moral outrage is likely a better deterrent than the law. But not having any knowledge of the material at hand, it’s difficult to know how a court would decide on a case where freedom of speech is part of the issue.
M
Mumbles140
Guest
Obviously, the public moral outrage has helped bring the issue to light, but it is the law that can stop such activity from occurring. Just because people are angry at the KKK doesn’t mean they’re going to stop. It’s when they get arrested for certain actions that make them think twice.
C
Charlotte408
Guest
He sold and sent it to someone in Florida, Florida’s obscenity law prohibits the “distribution of obscene material depicting minors engaged in conduct harmful to minors.” It was a felony…
THATS what I want to know! I asked like 2 or 3 pages ago and no one went there. Amazon sold 4,000 copies…are they going to go through those records and cross reference state laws with the purchases? Were any of those buyers in Florida?? It almost seems the fair thing to do. If they are really going to stick this guy with this.
- Status