Posted on 09/26/2002 7:19:14 AM PDT by scripter
Amazon.com has been accused by a nonprofit legal group of "contributing to the potential rape and molestation of children."
The online retailer's sale and promotion of the book "Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers," by David L. Riegel, is an unfair and unethical business practice, according to a letter sent yesterday to Amazon CEO Jeffrey Bezos by the United States Justice Foundation of Escondido, Calif.
The USJF has given Amazon 30 days to pull the book or face "protracted litigation."
In Riegel's book, released in 2000 by a publisher called SafeHaven Foundation Press, he writes: "Men who sexually pursue young boys are not monsters, but sincere, concerned, loving human beings who simply have a sexual orientation that is neither understood nor accepted by most others."
SafeHaven Foundation Press's purpose, according its website, is to "publish, distribute, and retail non-fiction works on the subjects of boylove, loved boys, and boylovers. "
The book's introduction credits the Internet for bringing into "public awareness" a topic that has been "disparaged and forcibly silenced."
"Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers" also can be bought through the bookseller Borders, which has a special arrangement with Amazon.com.
"For them to allow these nuts to come on and suggest that this is a good thing is an absolute travesty," said Richard Ackerman, litigation counsel for the United States Justice Foundation, who noted that he was a victim of molestation. "I'm not ashamed that I can speak from personal experience to say how evil this is."
'Responsible intergenerational relationships'
Riegel also runs a website "about responsible intergenerational relationships between males." He calls it a "discussion forum where the joys, sorrows, issues and questions of boylove can be brought for honest, thoughtful and respectful discussion in a positive manner."
In the book's introduction, Riegel says: "Whereas men who were loved as boys, and men who have shared their lives and themselves with one or more boys, were before almost totally isolated from one another, the Internet has made possible extended discussions among all who choose to participate."
Ackerman charges that Amazon.com, which allows readers to post their own reviews of books, has created its own "free-for-all forum whereby pedophiles can share their darkest fantasies and promotion of child-sodomy with all Amazon.com visitors, including children."
One reviewer wrote, "As a pedophile myself, I found this book to be enlightening in my quest to truly come to terms with my own sexuality."
On Amazon's site, readers can connect via e-mail with this particular reviewer, whose e-mail address begins with "minrfiend."
Another reviewer says, "As a boylover, I found this book extremely helpful. But it is not intended for the boylover community: It is meant for the general public who fear the phenomenon of pedosexuality. As such, it sets out to explain in plain language what this phenomenon is about."
"Amazon.com should not be used as a potential 'dating service' for those who would molest children," Ackerman wrote in his letter to Bezos, obtained by WND. "How, exactly, are you going to find peace of mind if one of your child-customers happens to be lured into molestation because of your site?"
Ackerman warns Amazon that it could find itself "in the position of being sued for wrongful death, negligence or other tortious conduct should a molester and child be joined up with each other as a result of your site."
"Even if you are not interested in doing what is morally right in this case, your commercial general liability insurance carrier should view the potential liability as an unacceptable financial risk," he said.
Yesterday, Amazon listed on its main page, under "Quick Picks," several of the titles it recommends to readers interested in Riegel's book. They include "Dream Boy," a story about two adolescent boys and their homosexual relationship, and "Touched," a novel about a molested boy.
Censorship?
A spokesperson for Amazon.com told WorldNetDaily that the company certainly does not endorse "Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers."
"Simply because we sell a book does not mean we agree with the ideas it contains," said Patricia Smith.
"We believe that people have the right to choose their own reading material," she said. "Our goal is to support freedom of expression and to provide customers with the broadest selection possible so they can find, discover, and buy any title they might be seeking."
Smith noted that "that selection includes some titles which most people, including employees of Amazon.com, may find distasteful or otherwise objectionable. However, Amazon.com believes it is censorship to make a book unavailable to our customers because we believe its message to be repugnant."
The Web retailer published a brief review of Riegel's book under the company's name, by editor Christopher Hart, which stated: "Is there such a thing as a legitimate sexual relationship between an adult male and an underage boy? Most civilized people would answer emphatically 'no,' and 'Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers' won't convince them otherwise. Defensive in tone and amateurishly produced, this monograph uses both pseudo-scholarship and anecdotes in its attempt to justify its target audience's actions and feelings."
In 1999, organized protests forced Amazon to drop from its website another book that promoted pedophilia, "Varieties of Man-Boy Love," and customers have lodged complaints about the sale of books on bestiality and incest.
The American Family Association launched a campaign against Amazon's sale of Riegel's book two years ago but got no response.
No law above the law
Riegel said in an introduction that the book, "while certainly bound to be controversial, and which espouses certain changes in various laws, is carefully maintained within the limits of current laws, there is nothing in it which could possibly concern any postal inspector, or which could create any legal liability."
However, Ackerman wrote in his letter to Bezos that Amazon could face legal action under California law, based on the premise that unethical acts can form the basis for liability for unfair business practices.
"Clearly, it is an unethical business practice for you to allow the promotion of child molestation in the manner presently available on your website," Ackerman wrote. "The potentially dangerous nature of your activities gives rise to a valid basis for seeking injunctive relief, and we fully intend on seeking such relief if you do not immediately take action to eliminate the risk to children that your site presently creates. Because protecting children is in the public interest, you may also be held liable for damages under the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act."
Free speech has parameters that would have been understood clearly by the Founding Fathers, insists Scott Lively, head of the Pro-Family Law Center in Citrus Heights, Calif.
In contrast, "today's idea of free speech really assumes there is no law above the law and that any kind of speech is acceptable regardless of the consequence to society," he told WND.
"The current approach to free speech in the United States is the French egalitarian model, that there are no standards by which we measure speech," Lively explained. "My belief is that the Founding Fathers assumed a Judeo-Christian premise in all of the founding documents, and therefore anything that is fundamentally contradictory to the nature of human beings created in the image of God" is not permitted.
Lively believes that the societal barriers against adult-child sex are eroding quickly, following on the heels of the breakdown in social consensus on subjects such as infidelity and homosexuality.
"This is not an anomaly," he said of Riegel's book. "My prediction is we are going to see legalized adult-child sex within three to five years."
He noted that in many states the age of consent has been lowered to 16 years, allowing some teachers who had sex with students to walk away free of prosecution.
"In the Title IX guidelines put out by the federal government on sexual harassment they actually have a policy asking whether or not the sex was consensual, giving discretion to the school district as to whether or not they are going to consider different policies based on whether the teen consented or didn't," Lively said. "So these are all things moving very rapidly in the direction of child sex."
A book released earlier this year that condones adult-child sex is part of a wider effort by some academics to bring pedophilia into the mainstream, according to researcher Judith Reisman.
Judith Levine's "Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex," seeks to challenge "widespread anxieties" about pedophilia, according to a promo.
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.