Amazon.com accused of aiding molesters

WorldNetDaily ^ | September 26, 2002 | Art Moore

[Constantine XIII]

There are limits to free speech, among which is speech that is a direct threat to public health ("FIRE!" in a crowded theatre" and encouraging people to imminent lawless action. Molesting children is, of course, against the law.

[yendu bwam]

There are limits to free speech, among which is speech that is a direct threat to public health ("FIRE!" in a crowded theatre" and encouraging people to imminent lawless action. Molesting children is, of course, against the law.

I would be very happy if the law could be used to pull these books. - They do incite violence against children.

[1rudeboy]

Whatever you do, don't click on this book while you're surfing Amazon.com. I can only imagine what will display when you return.

May We Recomend:

100 Romantic Cup-Cake Recipes For Boys, by Ped Rast

LOLOLOLOL

[1rudeboy]

"recommend"

[jejones]

To what extent, then, do you think everyone's speech should be constrained by what evil and stupid people who hear it might do? Some people might be inspired by the children's clothing section of the Sears catalog or the Target insert in the Sunday paper to commit unspeakable acts; do you oppose them as well?

[yendu bwam]

To what extent, then, do you think everyone's speech should be constrained by what evil and stupid people who hear it might do? Some people might be inspired by the children's clothing section of the Sears catalog or the Target insert in the Sunday paper to commit unspeakable acts; do you oppose them as well?

Nobody is constraining anybody's free speech!!! The writer of this digusting book may write it, and may sell it to anyone he wishes. THAT is free speech. There is no 'right' in the constitution that somebody has to sell your speech. Under my free speech rights, I could right a book on teaching kids how to jump onto trains from bridges. That doesn't mean I should expect a constitutional right for the corner bookstore to sell it. There is a very good likelihood that the dissemination of this book (and those like it) will actually cause little boys to be molested in a greater number than they would have been otherwise. Why would anyone with an ounce of moral fiber encourage the dissemination of that book? But even if no one did, it's a highly immoral thing to do. Jeff NAMBLA Bezos is hiding behind some glorified, but entirely fake principle. To not sell a book is not to censor it. To not sell a book denies no one free speech. To not sell a book encouraging child rape simply means that the bookseller doesn't think that's a good thing. Mr. NAMBLA-Bezos doesn't have enough moral fiber to actually take a stand that promoting child rape is a bad thing - bad enough that he can rely on selling millions of other books, but not that one. Same thing with books telling how to build a . Same thing with books telling how to poison people. He has NO moral fiber.