Posted on 09/26/2002 7:19:14 AM PDT by scripter
Yes, it is. As I pointed out in the previous posts, we just had a case of boy rapists claiming they did what they did because a NAMBLA website gave them encouragement and knowhow to do so. But obviously (and this is really common sense), when you distribute books that encourage and give 'moral' solace to those who would murder, rape, steal and brutalize, there are always some people who will be encouraged to so do as a result of reading such material. It's just like the show JackAss, where the lead guy does really stupid and dangerous things, and then kids go and try to do the same and hurt or maim themselves. Regardless of whether virtual child molestation is a crime, it's higly immoral and wrong - because it's likely that one or more kids will be molested as a result of publishing a book which encourages such deranged and horrific behavior. We've sunk way, way, way down in society when we can't morally condemn people who encourage others to do brutal and horrific things. We are a morally weak society, where we've lost the guts or honor to stand up against such.
Okay. So, if the book causes someone to do something that they otherwise wouldn't have, we can say that the book (or author, publisher, bookstore, et cetera) has incited the commission of a crime, yes?
Incite is a legal word. But Bezos' action may well lead to one or more kids being molested - just like the JackAss show on TV leads to kids' maiming themselves. Promoting child rape is a disgusting and immoral act. Bezos is no better than NAMBLA.
Of course - we are talking about the application of the law, and not just having a good old-fashioned book-burning, right? ;)
Anyway, "leads to" is good enough. So, if this book leads to the molestation of children, then we can say that the author/publisher/bookseller is at least partly responsible for that molestation, yes?
No, I wasn't. I was talking about the morality of what NAMBLA-friend Bezos is doing. It's wrong and immoral to promote child rape.
Knew you couldn't resist. Go ahead, spring your trap. Yes, it's wrong to take an action which leads to the molestation of children.
Anyway, if this book leads to the molestation of children, the people responsible for the book are at least partly responsible for the molestation of children, right?
Their actions lead to the likely molestation of some children, yes.
I gotta go to bed, soon, general re. But anyone who is involved directly in promoting child rape is highly immoral and evil. That includes the author of this vile book, Mr. NAMBLA-Bezos, who's marketing it, and the publisher. If someone stood on a soapbox in Times Square and started encouraging men to rape women, most good people would consider that evil and immoral as well. You seek to defend something which is totally indefensible. We have become a sick and twisted society, when we start encouraging and promoting the rape of children. Bezos = NAMBLA.
I'll look forward to this in the morning, but it's not about defending the indefensible. I think the book is a disgusting, vile piece of trash that should be exposed for what it is - a self-serving attempt to rationalize a perverse and disgusting crime.
But, what I am interested in doing is discussing the consequences of where your train of thought is eventually headed. So, when you're having your coffee tomorrow morning, consider this - if the book causes a person who otherwise would not have molested a child to go out and molest a child, and thereby causes an act to happen that never would have happened had the book not existed, isn't the book - and more specifically, its author, publisher, and/or seller - then entirely responsible for that particular act of molestation?
I'm still here, general_re. The answer is no. The person who committed the dastardly act is obviously also responsible. C'mon, you can't be so dense. Consider a situation where kids find a known bully and dare him to break some other kid's nose. The bully wouldn't have done it by himself, but he's predisposed to that sort of thing. The other kids press him and needle him, and tell him he's afraid, and that he won't get into trouble, etc. etc. In the end, an innocent kid's nose is broken. They're all complicit in a despicable act. Jeff NAMBLA Bezos is actively marketing a book which promotes child rape. He's like the kids exhorting the bully to do something bad. He's helping to encourage a vicious and disgusting crime. If you were standing with your son at the public square, and someone got up and started to exhort the men around you to rape teenage boys, you'd be outraged. Bezos is helping to exhort perverted men who may be around my sons (and whose identities I don't know) to do the same. He's a virtual child molestor. This IS an exceedinly immoral act. And he may well bring about the molestation of some teenage boys. Bezos is a rich and powerful man. He has no morals when he does this. NAMBLA = Bezos.
Easy there, cowboy - if I seem dense, I'm just trying to lay all the cards on the table. ;)
Okay, then. The perpetrator is partly responsible, and the person who egged him on is partly responsible, since the act wouldn't have taken place without the book, right?
Yes.
Yes, general_re. And I should add given the fair expectation that some would be encouraged to do such - as is the case with Bezos, and with the bully situation I mentioned, and with the case of the TV show Jackass.
This is the usual difference between first- and second-degree murder, BTW - it's a relatively well-established principle of law.
No, I disagree. A child molestor who reads this book is hardly being swept up in the moment. He reads it; he thinks about it. He likes the idea that the book condones what he wants to do. He gets ideas for defending the act he is considering. After reading the book ten times, he convinces himself to do it. He's not swept up. It's still completely premeditated. But the book has pushed him over the edge. But this is wholly irrelevant to my point anyway. Marketing a book which encourages people to rape children, and knowing that there's a (quite fair) chance that some people will be encouraged to rape as a result of reading the book, is highly immoral and wrong and should be condemned. Bezos = NAMBLA
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.