How Far Can You Stretch The First Amendment?

[Noomi]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

 

[martybegan]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

None of those books should be banned. In the 2nd case charges should be brought against the abusers as long as the statue of limitations has not expired.

Freedom of speech is a nasty thing some times. Actions should be punished if they are criminal, not words or ideas.

And of consequences we are talking governmental consequences. If people feel like shunning said person who wrote the material, then that is thier choice. The government, however cannot get involved.

 

[Noomi]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

None of those books should be banned. In the 2nd case charges should be brought against the abusers as long as the statue of limitations has not expired.

Freedom of speech is a nasty thing some times. Actions should be punished if they are criminal, not words or ideas.

And of consequences we are talking governmental consequences. If people feel like shunning said person who wrote the material, then that is thier choice. The government, however cannot get involved.

What happens if someone reads that book about how to groom a child, and acts on it? As in, follows the instructions the author has set out?

Of course, it is the person's choice that they acted on the authors writing, but if the book wasn't published...

Isn't such a book promoting pedophilia? Doesn't the rights of the child come first?

 

[Kondor3]

I don't know about Australia or modern-day judicial traditions across the Commonwealth, but, here in the US (which shares common legal and philosophical roots dating back a couple of centuries, but which has morphed into a related-but-separate legal tradition) we do have a body of law and judicial rulings which delineates Free Speech from Speech Harmful to the Common Good.

Mind you, that 'body of law' is a changing, moving target, but it exists, to draw upon, when precedents are needed or contemplated, and, in modern times, we have proven extremely reluctant to censor anything if we can avoid it.

There is probably more positive than negative to that reluctance but it does, of course, have its drawbacks.

Others can probably do a better job of citing relevant and specific examples of such law and rulings than I can.

 

[martybegan]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

None of those books should be banned. In the 2nd case charges should be brought against the abusers as long as the statue of limitations has not expired.

Freedom of speech is a nasty thing some times. Actions should be punished if they are criminal, not words or ideas.

And of consequences we are talking governmental consequences. If people feel like shunning said person who wrote the material, then that is thier choice. The government, however cannot get involved.

What happens if someone reads that book about how to groom a child, and acts on it? As in, follows the instructions the author has set out?

Of course, it is the person's choice that they acted on the authors writing, but if the book wasn't published...

Isn't such a book promoting pedophilia? Doesn't the rights of the child come first?

Considering such person was a pedophile in the first place, i dont think the book would be the thing that brought them over the edge.

And the person would get punished if they acted on it.

And please do go to the "think of the children" tripe on this thread. try to argue rationally, not emotionally.

Until you repeal the 1st amendment, laws against these sorts of publications are unconsitutional.

 

[Mad Scientist]

You wanna' see evidence of a Society's decay? People wonder why a Pedo book was pulled from shelves.

Any discussion as to why it was written in the first place? Nope.

Any talk of "tar and feathering" the author? Nope.

Amazon would sell anything if it made a buck. Anyone outraged about that? Nope.

 

[jwoodie]

Much of this discussion is rendered moot by the Internet. How would you stop this "book" from being published online?

 

[Katzndogz]

No books should be banned by the government. A book store does not have to carry the book, it is a private enterprise. No one has to buy the book, they are individuals who also have a right to be informed.

Someone concerned about their children might buy such a book so they can spot such grooming behavior and remove their children from the pedophile's influence just as well.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

If you don't like the speech, don't listen to it. Don't like the books, don't read them.

Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it should be banned.

I have the freedom of speech, you have the freedom to ignore it.

 

[Noomi]

No books should be banned by the government. A book store does not have to carry the book, it is a private enterprise. No one has to buy the book, they are individuals who also have a right to be informed.

Someone concerned about their children might buy such a book so they can spot such grooming behavior and remove their children from the pedophile's influence just as well.

So such a book should be allowed to be published and be publicly displayed by a bookstore in their front window if they wished?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Short answer, yes.

You are aware that books on how to make home made bombs are legal right? How to organize a resistance group, how to train a Resistance group , how to peacefully and violently oppose a Government? I don't see you complaining about them.

As for censure ship that is a dangerous road to go down, who gets to decide what is PC enough to be printed?

 

[Noomi]

Short answer, yes.

You are aware that books on how to make home made bombs are legal right? How to organize a resistance group, how to train a Resistance group , how to peacefully and violently oppose a Government? I don't see you complaining about them.

As for censure ship that is a dangerous road to go down, who gets to decide what is PC enough to be printed?

I don't think books telling people how to make bombs should be sold, especially after the terrorist attacks in the past few years. Things like that should be obvious - ban them.

As for who decides what is censored and what isn't, I don't know, but one would think that anything promoting pedophilia and child abuse etc would be taken off the shelves and burned.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

It is settled and accepted case law that child pornography is not protected free speech. See: New York v. Ferber (1982).

The book by the abused woman, on the other hand, is protected free expression, as it’s her own personal account of abuse, there are no other children involved in sexual conduct, and no other children are at risk.

When the government seeks to restrict, curtail, preempt, or limit a given fundamental right, it must have a compelling interest, a legitimate legislative purpose, and be motivated by facts and documented evidence.

Clearly the state’s interest to protect children from abuse in the context of sexual exploitation is both compelling and legitimate, and such restrictions placed on the First Amendment are valid.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Short answer, yes.

You are aware that books on how to make home made bombs are legal right? How to organize a resistance group, how to train a Resistance group , how to peacefully and violently oppose a Government? I don't see you complaining about them.

As for censure ship that is a dangerous road to go down, who gets to decide what is PC enough to be printed?

I don't think books telling people how to make bombs should be sold, especially after the terrorist attacks in the past few years. Things like that should be obvious - ban them.

As for who decides what is censored and what isn't, I don't know, but one would think that anything promoting pedophilia and child abuse etc would be taken off the shelves and burned.

One fails to see the point, all bomb-making information is on the internet.

The problem is laws designed to prevent criminals from obtaining information about WMDs must be predicated on proof that there was intent to commit a federal offense or engage in some other criminal purpose.

It’s virtually impossible to obtain such ‘proof’ prior to a criminal act. And the First Amendment right to read or write about how to make a bomb can’t be preempted or restricted because one might commit a criminal act.

 

[eots]

You wanna' see evidence of a Society's decay? People wonder why a Pedo book was pulled from shelves.

Any discussion as to why it was written in the first place? Nope.

Any talk of "tar and feathering" the author? Nope.

Amazon would sell anything if it made a buck. Anyone outraged about that? Nope.

There is no violation of the first amendment in boycotting amazon

 

[eots]

THIS GUY HAS PUBLISHED A NUMBER OF BOOKS IN AUSTRALIA THEY ARE AVAILABLE IN THE PUBLICLY LIBRARY

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNhN8AD8Kr8]Most scary kiddy fiddler - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

Stretch? I think you are looking at this the wrong way, if we start letting the government tell people they can't say things that offend people what is going to prevent them from telling you, as in Noomi, that you cannot say something? Should I be able to demand that you apologize for saying that Christians are hateful when they oppose same sex marraige? Or that you shouldn't be able to say that abortion is a right? Should I be able to have you lashed and spend 15 years in prison because you express an opinion that doesn't fit my theology?

Prison, lashes for liberal Saudi web forum founder | Nation & World | The Seattle Times

This is not even open for debate in my opinion,It is absolutely impossible to defend the premise that the government should be able to punish speech.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How far can you take freedom of speech before you reach the conclusion that some speech should be banned?

The 1st Amendment means you can basically say whatever the hell you like, no matter how hateful, homophobic, or racist it might be.

But how about this - lets say a pedophile self publishes a book directed at other pedophiles, telling them how to groom a child, how to approach them, touch them, etc. Should such a book be banned because it discusses child abuse in graphic detail?
Does it fall under free speech?

How about a book written by a woman who was abused by a pedophile from the age of seven? This woman wrote a book saying she 'loved' her abuser, and wanted to marry him. She describes their first sexual encounter (she was 8) in graphic detail -

Truth or fiction? A young girl's graphic account of her 15-year relationship with a paedophile from the age of seven | Mail Online

Should that be banned?

How about this book? The Pedophiles Guide To Love And Pleasure?

Amazon Pulls Pedophilia Book Without Explanation | Video | TheBlaze.com

Freedom of speech, or going way too far?

What about books that conservatives would say promote homosexuality? Should they removed from public school libraries? What about freedom of speech, and the rights of students to read such material if they so wish?

Can people say whatever they want without fear of consequences? Or should you be permitted to say whatever you like, but have to deal with the consequences if someone doesn't like what you are saying, and decides to let you know with a right hook to the cheek?

None of those books should be banned. In the 2nd case charges should be brought against the abusers as long as the statue of limitations has not expired.

Freedom of speech is a nasty thing some times. Actions should be punished if they are criminal, not words or ideas.

And of consequences we are talking governmental consequences. If people feel like shunning said person who wrote the material, then that is thier choice. The government, however cannot get involved.

What happens if someone reads that book about how to groom a child, and acts on it? As in, follows the instructions the author has set out?

Of course, it is the person's choice that they acted on the authors writing, but if the book wasn't published...

Isn't such a book promoting pedophilia? Doesn't the rights of the child come first?

It has happened, but that is still preferable to people being lashed and sent to prison for saying things the government disapproves of.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You wanna' see evidence of a Society's decay? People wonder why a Pedo book was pulled from shelves.

Any discussion as to why it was written in the first place? Nope.

Any talk of "tar and feathering" the author? Nope.

Amazon would sell anything if it made a buck. Anyone outraged about that? Nope.

It was written because somebody thought they could make money off of it, or because the author has something he wanted to say, the same reasons everything else is written.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No books should be banned by the government. A book store does not have to carry the book, it is a private enterprise. No one has to buy the book, they are individuals who also have a right to be informed.

Someone concerned about their children might buy such a book so they can spot such grooming behavior and remove their children from the pedophile's influence just as well.

So such a book should be allowed to be published and be publicly displayed by a bookstore in their front window if they wished?

Would you prefer we flog anyone with an opinion you don't like?