[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
As someone pointed out earlier, this book is not going to make someone a pedophile.
[/quote]
Part of the problem as I see it, is that your claim above is not known. (I admit still not being too familiar with the content of this book in particular)
The premise that a pedophile is a pedophile and cannot be encouraged or created by media is not necessary true (or false) but it really is not understood so I don’t think anyone can claim one way or another.
Edited to add:
To that I’d sat the consumers of porn (any kind of porn) are the ones creating a demand for it. In addition, there seems to be a reasonable risk of normalizing and accepting unacceptable behavior.
[/quote]
I said something like this in another thread. About if they had an outlet or whatever and I cannot think of it. I think it was in SAMA though.[/quote]
[quote]debraD wrote:
^^One more thing on that thought:
Do any of you guys out there think you could give up sex with women if only you have unfettered access to porn? I don’t think I could give up on sex with men, and in my experience, porn increases my appetite.[/quote]
The constant barrage of pedophilia in the media has made it awkward to be around children.
How do we define pedophilia in this thread, btw? Certain cases in â??To Catch a Predatorâ?? were really questionable and ridiculous, even. I’ve seen a few episodes on Youtube and, I’m sorry, but a 20-year-old having sex with a 15-year-old is nowhere near serious enough to ruin that 20-year-olds life for a considerable time. It’s just not right. It’s odd, IMO, but not sick. But then again, I thought it was odd for a senior in high school to go out with a freshman.
Regarding what Amazon should do, they have the right to sell it or pull it. They shouldn’t, however, be forced to pull it. I’m against censorship in general. It doesn’t really help or solve anything. As others have said, it’s a very slippery slope, censorship.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
As someone pointed out earlier, this book is not going to make someone a pedophile.
[/quote]
Part of the problem as I see it, is that your claim above is not known. (I admit still not being too familiar with the content of this book in particular)
The premise that a pedophile is a pedophile and cannot be encouraged or created by media is not necessary true (or false) but it really is not understood so I don’t think anyone can claim one way or another.
Edited to add:
To that I’d sat the consumers of porn (any kind of porn) are the ones creating a demand for it. In addition, there seems to be a reasonable risk of normalizing and accepting unacceptable behavior.
[/quote]
Well, although I don’t want to get a pissing contest - because there are no easy answers here, you really make no point in your first paragraph. Make a point! But let’s do a thought experiment since we don’t have anyone to lay a scientific claim one way or the other. I am a committed heterosexual - and I’m not talking about one of those guys in the MMF SAMA thread that are so insecure that the sight of another man’s junk sends them running into the corner. I love women and I am not threatened one bit by men. In other words, I am a lifelong, healthy, committed, content, dedicated, true blue heterosexual NO AMOUNT OF ACCESS TO GAY PORN OR THE VIEWING OF GAY PORN COULD EVER MAKE ME GAY
I find it far fetched, that we can “create” a pedophile with media. It’s tantamount to “curing” gays.
Next, consumers of porn do create demand for it. I will concede that. However, a method of enforcement that fixates on the end user is a backward ass approach to protecting children. Judging by the arrests we read about nearly weekly, in every locale, the child porn viewership problem is enormous. And it’s NOT going to go away. Fact is, it is a form of sexual expression, whether you want to label it “deviant” matters not - it’s part of the spectrum of sexual expression, whether accepted, mainstream, legal, or not. The point? It’s not going anywhere. And it’s certainly not going to diminish based on the poorly guided idea that you can eradicate it by targeting the end user. Should it be legal? No. I think it’s simply to horrible and unlike other forms of sexual expression, child porn has a clear victim.
Now, onto normalizing and desensitizing. I accept that. It’s a reasonable observation. So I ask, where do we stop? Rap music? Violent movies? Violent cartoons. Most porn? These are all slippery slopes.
No doubt about it…child porn SHOULD be illegal. However, we need to stop focusing on the guys with the crap on their computer and focus on the producers of this sick shit. Making another guy from the burbs do the walk of shame has done nothing to curtail the demand for it. Maybe if we point all those resources to the producers, and then throw them under the jail forever, will we start saving lives.
I have a point there somewhere I think…forgive the stream of consciousness ramble again
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
As someone pointed out earlier, this book is not going to make someone a pedophile.
[/quote]
Part of the problem as I see it, is that your claim above is not known. (I admit still not being too familiar with the content of this book in particular)
The premise that a pedophile is a pedophile and cannot be encouraged or created by media is not necessary true (or false) but it really is not understood so I don’t think anyone can claim one way or another.
Edited to add:
To that I’d sat the consumers of porn (any kind of porn) are the ones creating a demand for it. In addition, there seems to be a reasonable risk of normalizing and accepting unacceptable behavior.
[/quote]
Well, although I don’t want to get a pissing contest - because there are no easy answers here, you really make no point in your first paragraph. Make a point! But let’s do a thought experiment since we don’t have anyone to lay a scientific claim one way or the other. I am a committed heterosexual - and I’m not talking about one of those guys in the MMF SAMA thread that are so insecure that the sight of another man’s junk sends them running into the corner. I love women and I am not threatened one bit by men. In other words, I am a lifelong, healthy, committed, content, dedicated, true blue heterosexual NO AMOUNT OF ACCESS TO GAY PORN OR THE VIEWING OF GAY PORN COULD EVER MAKE ME GAY
I find it far fetched, that we can “create” a pedophile with media. It’s tantamount to “curing” gays.
Next, consumers or porn do create demand for it. I will concede that. However, a method of enforcement that fixates on the end user is a backward ass approach to protecting children. Judging by the arrests we read about nearly weekly, in every locale, the child porn viewership problem is enormous. And it’s going to go away. Fact is, it is a form of sexual expression, whether you want to label it “deviant” matters not - it’s part of the spectrum of sexual expression, whether accepted, mainstream, legal, or not. The point? It’s not going anywhere. And it’s certainly not going to diminish based on the poorly guided idea that you can eradicate it by targeting the end user. Should it be legal? No. I think it’s simply to horrible and unlike other forms of sexual expression, child porn has a clear victim.
Now, onto normalizing and desensitizing. I accept that. It’s a reasonable observation. So I ask, where do we stop? Rap music? Violent movies? Violent cartoons. Most porn? These are all slippery slopes.
No doubt about it…child porn SHOULD be illegal. However, we need to stop focusing on the guys with the crap on their computer and focus on the producers of this sick shit. Making another guy from the burbs do the walk of shame has done nothing to curtail the demand for it. Maybe if we point all those resources to the producers, and then throw them under the jail forever, will we start saving lives.
I have a point there somewhere I think…forgive the stream of consciousness ramble again :)[/quote]
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t there laws for people possessing child porn and laws for people making child porn? You make it sound like there are no laws against producing/distributing child porn.
[quote]debraD wrote:
^^One more thing on that thought:
Do any of you guys out there think you could give up sex with women if only you have unfettered access to porn? I don’t think I could give up on sex with men, and in my experience, porn increases my appetite.[/quote]
Another thought; I think there is enough existing material out there for the deviants to view until the end of time. I really wonder if having an outlet for their interest would save children. You viewing porn increases your appetite. I get that. Sometimes, you get an itch that rubbing one out can’t scratch However, rubbing one out has also done the opposite for me too, like going back to an ex or some meaningless casual encounter. In other words, at times, it was “therapeutic” and at other times, with someone tangible in my life, it made me want to “go get some” lol. No easy answers. But I’m pretty sure a good portion of child porn viewers were probably just curious or had an unhealthy interest but have or would never have acted on it in real life.
Like with violence in the movies and music, you will always have a camp that says the music and movies made that kid do what he did…and you will have the camp that points to the millions that view it, listen to it and remain law abiding - and the latter goes back to my earlier point about the courts almost telling you what to think when they try to tackle this stuff. My final thought? I want them to spend all the resources on the guys committing the actual crimes - not picking the low lying fruit in the form of the men merely watching it.
Following one last analogy - there are snuff films on the internet - one was posted here with those sickos that were attacking people and beat some guy to death with a hammer and filmed it. MURDER is illegal. Many here viewed the clip (and regretted it, as did I). Are those of us that viewed it complicit in the crime? Are we creating a “demand” for the material? What if some of us like viewing this stuff? Does that mean we’re a murderer-in-waiting? Does it mean we have already committed murder? Well, the way child porn is prosecuted, all of us who viewed the clip would be getting visits, our computers seized, names in the paper, etc., while the murderers continued to make snuff films.
I don’t mind a book about pedophilia anymore than I mind a book about how to commit murder. Almost every crime novel and most “real TV” crime shows are an introductory course to commit murder if you are so inclined. In a free society, this material will always be available. We have to allow the worst of the worst, to ensure you freedoms are not infringed upon. Because once we draw lines, the guy with the pen in his hand keeps drawing…and the guy with the pen might not like gays, catholics, muslims, etc. It’s just the price we pay, to keep the pen out of someone’s hand…
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
As someone pointed out earlier, this book is not going to make someone a pedophile.
[/quote]
Part of the problem as I see it, is that your claim above is not known. (I admit still not being too familiar with the content of this book in particular)
The premise that a pedophile is a pedophile and cannot be encouraged or created by media is not necessary true (or false) but it really is not understood so I don’t think anyone can claim one way or another.
Edited to add:
To that I’d sat the consumers of porn (any kind of porn) are the ones creating a demand for it. In addition, there seems to be a reasonable risk of normalizing and accepting unacceptable behavior.
[/quote]
Well, although I don’t want to get a pissing contest - because there are no easy answers here, you really make no point in your first paragraph. Make a point! But let’s do a thought experiment since we don’t have anyone to lay a scientific claim one way or the other. I am a committed heterosexual - and I’m not talking about one of those guys in the MMF SAMA thread that are so insecure that the sight of another man’s junk sends them running into the corner. I love women and I am not threatened one bit by men. In other words, I am a lifelong, healthy, committed, content, dedicated, true blue heterosexual NO AMOUNT OF ACCESS TO GAY PORN OR THE VIEWING OF GAY PORN COULD EVER MAKE ME GAY
I find it far fetched, that we can “create” a pedophile with media. It’s tantamount to “curing” gays.
Next, consumers or porn do create demand for it. I will concede that. However, a method of enforcement that fixates on the end user is a backward ass approach to protecting children. Judging by the arrests we read about nearly weekly, in every locale, the child porn viewership problem is enormous. And it’s going to go away. Fact is, it is a form of sexual expression, whether you want to label it “deviant” matters not - it’s part of the spectrum of sexual expression, whether accepted, mainstream, legal, or not. The point? It’s not going anywhere. And it’s certainly not going to diminish based on the poorly guided idea that you can eradicate it by targeting the end user. Should it be legal? No. I think it’s simply to horrible and unlike other forms of sexual expression, child porn has a clear victim.
Now, onto normalizing and desensitizing. I accept that. It’s a reasonable observation. So I ask, where do we stop? Rap music? Violent movies? Violent cartoons. Most porn? These are all slippery slopes.
No doubt about it…child porn SHOULD be illegal. However, we need to stop focusing on the guys with the crap on their computer and focus on the producers of this sick shit. Making another guy from the burbs do the walk of shame has done nothing to curtail the demand for it. Maybe if we point all those resources to the producers, and then throw them under the jail forever, will we start saving lives.
I have a point there somewhere I think…forgive the stream of consciousness ramble again :)[/quote]
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t there laws for people possessing child porn and laws for people making child porn? You make it sound like there are no laws against producing/distributing child porn.[/quote]
I’m saying that from where I sit, it would appear that law enforcement is mostly directed at the viewers because they are truly low lying fruit - easy to find, easy to prosecute. I’m merely advocating the effort go toward the producers - relatively speaking, I’m not worried about the guy with that kink that isn’t actually harming children. It seems every week, you can find an article on some local guy getting busted for viewership…and I never hear about any big bust about the producers of this crap. Sure, I understand there is no “VIVID VIDEO” for child porn, and that much of it is shared among the deviants that commit and film the acts - but I want LE to go after THEM.
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
As someone pointed out earlier, this book is not going to make someone a pedophile.
[/quote]
Part of the problem as I see it, is that your claim above is not known. (I admit still not being too familiar with the content of this book in particular)
The premise that a pedophile is a pedophile and cannot be encouraged or created by media is not necessary true (or false) but it really is not understood so I don’t think anyone can claim one way or another.
Edited to add:
To that I’d sat the consumers of porn (any kind of porn) are the ones creating a demand for it. In addition, there seems to be a reasonable risk of normalizing and accepting unacceptable behavior.
[/quote]
Well, although I don’t want to get a pissing contest - because there are no easy answers here, you really make no point in your first paragraph. Make a point! But let’s do a thought experiment since we don’t have anyone to lay a scientific claim one way or the other. I am a committed heterosexual - and I’m not talking about one of those guys in the MMF SAMA thread that are so insecure that the sight of another man’s junk sends them running into the corner. I love women and I am not threatened one bit by men. In other words, I am a lifelong, healthy, committed, content, dedicated, true blue heterosexual NO AMOUNT OF ACCESS TO GAY PORN OR THE VIEWING OF GAY PORN COULD EVER MAKE ME GAY
I find it far fetched, that we can “create” a pedophile with media. It’s tantamount to “curing” gays.
Next, consumers or porn do create demand for it. I will concede that. However, a method of enforcement that fixates on the end user is a backward ass approach to protecting children. Judging by the arrests we read about nearly weekly, in every locale, the child porn viewership problem is enormous. And it’s going to go away. Fact is, it is a form of sexual expression, whether you want to label it “deviant” matters not - it’s part of the spectrum of sexual expression, whether accepted, mainstream, legal, or not. The point? It’s not going anywhere. And it’s certainly not going to diminish based on the poorly guided idea that you can eradicate it by targeting the end user. Should it be legal? No. I think it’s simply to horrible and unlike other forms of sexual expression, child porn has a clear victim.
Now, onto normalizing and desensitizing. I accept that. It’s a reasonable observation. So I ask, where do we stop? Rap music? Violent movies? Violent cartoons. Most porn? These are all slippery slopes.
No doubt about it…child porn SHOULD be illegal. However, we need to stop focusing on the guys with the crap on their computer and focus on the producers of this sick shit. Making another guy from the burbs do the walk of shame has done nothing to curtail the demand for it. Maybe if we point all those resources to the producers, and then throw them under the jail forever, will we start saving lives.
I have a point there somewhere I think…forgive the stream of consciousness ramble again :)[/quote]
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t there laws for people possessing child porn and laws for people making child porn? You make it sound like there are no laws against producing/distributing child porn.[/quote]
I’m saying that from where I sit, it would appear that law enforcement is mostly directed at the viewers because they are truly low lying fruit - easy to find, easy to prosecute. I’m merely advocating the effort go toward the producers - relatively speaking, I’m not worried about the guy with that kink that isn’t actually harming children. It seems every week, you can find an article on some local guy getting busted for viewership…and I never hear about any big bust about the producers of this crap. Sure, I understand there is no “VIVID VIDEO” for child porn, and that much of it is shared among the deviants that commit and film the acts - but I want LE to go after THEM.[/quote]
[quote]debraD wrote:
^^One more thing on that thought:
Do any of you guys out there think you could give up sex with women if only you have unfettered access to porn? I don’t think I could give up on sex with men, and in my experience, porn increases my appetite.[/quote]
Another thought; I think there is enough existing material out there for the deviants to view until the end of time. I really wonder if having an outlet for their interest would save children. You viewing porn increases your appetite. I get that. Sometimes, you get an itch that rubbing one out can’t scratch However, rubbing one out has also done the opposite for me too, like going back to an ex or some meaningless casual encounter. In other words, at times, it was “therapeutic” and at other times, with someone tangible in my life, it made me want to “go get some” lol. No easy answers. But I’m pretty sure a good portion of child porn viewers were probably just curious or had an unhealthy interest but have or would never have acted on it in real life.
Like with violence in the movies and music, you will always have a camp that says the music and movies made that kid do what he did…and you will have the camp that points to the millions that view it, listen to it and remain law abiding - and the latter goes back to my earlier point about the courts almost telling you what to think when they try to tackle this stuff. My final thought? I want them to spend all the resources on the guys committing the actual crimes - not picking the low lying fruit in the form of the men merely watching it.
Following one last analogy - there are snuff films on the internet - one was posted here with those sickos that were attacking people and beat some guy to death with a hammer and filmed it. MURDER is illegal. Many here viewed the clip (and regretted it, as did I). Are those of us that viewed it complicit in the crime? Are we creating a “demand” for the material? What if some of us like viewing this stuff? Does that mean we’re a murderer-in-waiting? Does it mean we have already committed murder? Well, the way child porn is prosecuted, all of us who viewed the clip would be getting visits, our computers seized, names in the paper, etc., while the murderers continued to make snuff films.
I don’t mind a book about pedophilia anymore than I mind a book about how to commit murder. Almost every crime novel and most “real TV” crime shows are an introductory course to commit murder if you are so inclined. In a free society, this material will always be available. We have to allow the worst of the worst, to ensure you freedoms are not infringed upon. Because once we draw lines, the guy with the pen in his hand keeps drawing…and the guy with the pen might not like gays, catholics, muslims, etc. It’s just the price we pay, to keep the pen out of someone’s hand…[/quote]
There have been quite a few times when I’ve kept myself from having sex with someone I would regret it with by rubbing one out before acting on my arousal. Never anything illegal, but there have been people that I would have been ashamed of having had sex with if it wasn’t for my “eye-opening” method. I’m much better off because of it.
Apparently there were several books on Amazon: “We were not abused” and something else like “Boy lovers and boys who are loved” or something…They pulled those books too.
[quote]KAS wrote:
Funny how everyone talks about the slippery slope of censorship and promtly jumps on an equaly slippery slope towards legitimising pedophilia.[/quote]
no one is legitimizing pedophilia. we’re talking about a book. we’re no more “legitimizing” pedophilia than arguing against the censorship of a book about murder “legitimizes” murder. these are difficult issues and there are no clear answers and we can all agree to disagree. but if you think someone is actually “legitimizing pedophilia” the thread has passed over your head.
[quote]KAS wrote:
Funny how everyone talks about the slippery slope of censorship and promtly jumps on an equaly slippery slope towards legitimising pedophilia.[/quote]
no one is legitimizing pedophilia. we’re talking about a book. we’re no more “legitimizing” pedophilia than arguing against the censorship of a book about murder “legitimizes” murder. these are difficult issues and there are no clear answers and we can all agree to disagree. but if you think someone is actually “legitimizing pedophilia” the thread has passed over your head. [/quote]
It is funny how I got personal attacks for saying the exact same thing. It shows that many here have more of a problem with WHO says what instead of what is being said.
No one in this thread that I can tell is FOR pedophilia. Being against censorship does not mean we are FOR everything that could be censored.
It’s either because you’re black or because you’re about to spring for a Mustang, and the haters are Camaro lovers. Those mother fuckers.
But yes, what Nikki posted is true: Amazon bought a self-publishing service called Create Space (I think) that allows anyone to publish. You can only imagine how many thousands of authors try to publish something each day.
It would be nearly impossible to filter all books prior to allowing their sale, let alone it being bad for business: a self-publishing site that takes months to get published? Where’s the competitive edge from a business standpoint?
Amazon could probably sample a few books out of every 1,000 but that means that books like this could still “get through” if they weren’t the ones sampled (for censorship/appropriateness of content).
Some of you have trouble thinking about this in a business context. We’re not talking about serving 5-10 customers a day or whatever volume of sales traffic you’re used to handling. We’re talking about the largest “e-tailer” in the world having to reconcile providing near-instant, scalable service (scalable = handling 100k users without getting bogged down) and offering the same 1:1 QA of their products. Shit just gets through that was never intended.
Nevermind the freedom of speech issue at play here.
[quote]KAS wrote:
Funny how everyone talks about the slippery slope of censorship and promtly jumps on an equaly slippery slope towards legitimising pedophilia.[/quote]
no one is legitimizing pedophilia. we’re talking about a book. we’re no more “legitimizing” pedophilia than arguing against the censorship of a book about murder “legitimizes” murder. these are difficult issues and there are no clear answers and we can all agree to disagree. but if you think someone is actually “legitimizing pedophilia” the thread has passed over your head. [/quote]
It is funny how I got personal attacks for saying the exact same thing. It shows that many here have more of a problem with WHO says what instead of what is being said.
No one in this thread that I can tell is FOR pedophilia. Being against censorship does not mean we are FOR everything that could be censored.[/quote]
It’s funny, isn’t it, how some people here manage to avoid derision by writing sensible, intelligent posts that are free from condescension and insults.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Would a very graphic and explicit novel (fiction) on the subject of pedophilia and child murder also be on some of you folks’ censor list?
How about a cloth-bound coffee table book containing beautifully rendered Renaissance drawings and paintings of innocently nude children?
What about a book of whimsical line-drawn cartoon kids in sexy situations?
Fuck censorship.[/quote]
i concur. and i noticed you changed your avatar. subtle, lol.
It is very rare that I advocate the banning of something. I absolutely support the banning of any material that is supportive of having sex with children. I know it’s been stated before, but the book is aimed at making it easier to get around the law for engaging in sexual activities with children. Yes…censorship sucks. But would everyone on here that is in favor of not silencing this book be okay with someone standing on the corner talking and passing information about how to get away with having sex with children. It’s freedom of speech after all.
What if a book came out and it was tips on raping a woman and how not to get caught?
Isn’t there a line that eventually gets crossed?
Censorship happens and sometimes it’s perfectly okay. If I published a book on how to bomb a school without getting caught, would we all just turn a blind eye? I realize that’s extreme and not in the same catagory but both are examples of an activity that involves hurting others and skirting the law.
This would be the first time I’ve ever advocated banning a book or any material of the same.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
It’s either because you’re black or because you’re about to spring for a Mustang, and the haters are Camaro lovers. Those mother fuckers.
But yes, what Nikki posted is true: Amazon bought a self-publishing service called Create Space (I think) that allows anyone to publish. You can only imagine how many thousands of authors try to publish something each day.
It would be nearly impossible to filter all books prior to allowing their sale, let alone it being bad for business: a self-publishing site that takes months to get published? Where’s the competitive edge from a business standpoint?
Amazon could probably sample a few books out of every 1,000 but that means that books like this could still “get through” if they weren’t the ones sampled (for censorship/appropriateness of content).
Some of you have trouble thinking about this in a business context. We’re not talking about serving 5-10 customers a day or whatever volume of sales traffic you’re used to handling. We’re talking about the largest “e-tailer” in the world having to reconcile providing near-instant, scalable service (scalable = handling 100k users without getting bogged down) and offering the same 1:1 QA of their products. Shit just gets through that was never intended.
Nevermind the freedom of speech issue at play here.[/quote]
“Freedom of speech” as some abstract, independent ideal doesn’t and hasn’t ever truly existed.
The people arguing that censoring a book about pedophilia is a slippery slope toward tyranny and totalitarian government are assuming that we can either be on or off the slope. That’s not and has never been the case. Every society ever has limited speech in some way. You can’t run into an airport screaming about a bomb, you can’t threaten to kill somebody, etc. Google up ‘clear and present danger’ for more examples.
There IS a line, we ARE on the slope. Things like this cause us to redfine ‘the line’ and reevalute where we stand on the slope and sacrifice personal freedoms accordingly. As soon as freedom of expression infringes on someone’s civil liberties, we as a society decide whether or not we are willing to give up some of our freedom in favor of other ideals (safety, security, not getting molested).
Further, one could argue just as strongly that if the government never interfered we would be on just as slippery of a slope toward anarchy and chaos.
Basically what I’m saying is freedom of speech is a hollow concept. When push comes to shove, society will voice its opinion and expression will be censored.
Amazon removing the book out of fear of being boycotted or whatever is the same thing as the government censoring the book, just through the court of public opinion rather than the court of law.
[quote]celibrate2047 wrote:
It is very rare that I advocate the banning of something. I absolutely support the banning of any material that is supportive of having sex with children. I know it’s been stated before, but the book is aimed at making it easier to get around the law for engaging in sexual activities with children. Yes…censorship sucks. But would everyone on here that is in favor of not silencing this book be okay with someone standing on the corner talking and passing information about how to get away with having sex with children. It’s freedom of speech after all.
What if a book came out and it was tips on raping a woman and how not to get caught?
Isn’t there a line that eventually gets crossed?
Censorship happens and sometimes it’s perfectly okay. If I published a book on how to bomb a school without getting caught, would we all just turn a blind eye? I realize that’s extreme and not in the same catagory but both are examples of an activity that involves hurting others and skirting the law.
This would be the first time I’ve ever advocated banning a book or any material of the same.[/quote]
All this information is already out there… letting your emotions cloud the issue is counter productive. As others have stated… should murder novels, movies, shows etc… be censored too. I’m almost positive I can murder some random person or bomb a place and get away with it… am I ever going to try… or even give it more thought past this post… absolutely not… but hints/tips etc… can easily be found in books or online.
If you want your freedoms you must allow it… the instant you decide something like this is no longer legal(writing a book promoting pedophilia… lol feel weird even saying that)… you start a chain reaction… no one can be trusted to make such a judgment call… who knows what else they disprove of.
also sorry if this post makes no sense… its 5 am lol
But let’s do a thought experiment since we don’t have anyone to lay a scientific claim one way or the other. I am a committed heterosexual - and I’m not talking about one of those guys in the MMF SAMA thread that are so insecure that the sight of another man’s junk sends them running into the corner. I love women and I am not threatened one bit by men. In other words, I am a lifelong, healthy, committed, content, dedicated, true blue heterosexual