Shocked to see what Amazon.com is selling.......

[RoqueC]

Even worse is the idea of somebody buying it.

 

[Beauty]

Sick! This had touched my family closely and there is no excuse for it. I do agree with the 1st amendment and I do believe that certain types of pornography should be okay in a persons home and privacy....but there is a difference in men and women, men and men and women and women and CHILDREN! This is ILLEGAL! This is something that will scar these children for life. I would respect anything without the involvement of children but when children come into it then in my opinion they have gone too far. I also will not buy from them again.

 

[Kermit]

Just because something is protected by the Constitution doesn't mean a store has to sell it. They have every right to (if the product is legal, and in this case it's questionable), but consumers also have the right to be informed about what a store is selling and make purchasing decisions based on that knowledge.

 

[ZPT1022]

I think the book is sick, however I highly doubt Amazon analyzes every book or item they sell, I tend to blame the publisher for putting it in print. And please, no one think I am advocating child abuse or any kind of abuse or molestation, trust me I'm not, but I really hate it when say, a 17 year old girl has a 19 year old boyfriend and then Mommy and Daddy find out what their daughter is doing and scream abuse. That's not right either. In this situation though, I think they mean little kids (and non-consenting too) which is really really sick.

 

[EROS]

Amazon also sells MEIN KAMPF which is the sick manifesto of the NAZI rolleyes: . They also sell CATCHER IN THE RYE ......., AND they also sell I KNOW WHY THE CAGED BIRD SINGS .

I'm not surprised that many on the DIS call for censorship. When people are sooooooooooooooooo RIGHTEOUS, they always KNOW what should be "allowed" reading for the masses ......

 

[luv2nascar]

this book is child pornography
it is just a handbook for that dumb men who love boys club
it is illegal to have sex with children period...
It is not acceptable to be distributed in this form
not acceptable when they take pictures of children naked and different poses for art, museums, etc either

These are children. Remember that children can not protect protect themselves. We must be vigilant with animals like this.

I saw on tv where these men wish to keep throwing this in our face till we find it less offensive. They feel over time they can legalize having sex with a child. What.....I mean these truly are sick people.

Take a stance. Don't support amazon or other sites that allow this to be sold.

 

[ncligs]

luv2nascar,
You are 100% right!!!!!!!

 

[EROS]

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.

Noam Chomsky

 

[Saffron]

It's sick and disgusting. I won't support the right of any person or entity to exploit children, ever, in any shape or form!!!!

 

[robinb]

Science Fiction or Science Fact?

 

[lilboo]

I won't expound any further on the freedom of expression.

The content in these books are heinous but the antidote is not, I feel, its suppression bc its suppression can't make it go away.

We're fighting over two different ways of pursuing the same goal: the eradication of such perversion. If we as a people aren't made aware of this in such popular venues as amazon, how can we, in an informed way, attack this problem?

I think the furor over this here proves the value of bringing exposure to this kind of material. We are incensed , disgusted, and most importantly, we are talking about it.

I feel we have to expose cancers and molds to the sun in order to deal with it smartly-or we can bury our heads in the sand , talk about the latest tabloid gossip or whatever fluff. (and I LOVE fluff.)

edited to add-I may not have been quite OT-but here, I assumed pedophile material sold online was tracked.

 

[EROS]

ROBINB, the DIS is full of "wanna-be" firemen

 

[Robinrs]

Pedophilia is out of the range of RIGHTS and SUPPORT...

The idea that people use the first amendment to support their rights to something so sadistic takes away everything freedom and the American way stands for.

Those who support it should have it happen in their lives and see how it makes THEM feel.

As our consumer advocate says, if you are unsatisfied with a company VOTE WITH YOUR FEET.

As for Amazon, they will NEVER get my money again.

And as for Michael Eisner, he should be ashamed of himself. He sounds like the jerks I work for ...

 

[Disney Doll]

I'd have to agree with the posters who said that they may have the right to sell it, but I also have the right not to buy it, or to choose to buy anything through Amazon.com anymore. It is a business, pure and simple, and if the business is hit where it hurts, in the pocketbook, they will rethink their business practices. As long as there are people in the worldwho support this kind of thing, there will be businesses who sell it.

If you don'tlike what Amazon.com is doing, don't use their website anymore. That is now my intention, based on this information.That sends a much stronger message to a profit-driven organization than any moral outrage we can muster.

 

[lilboo]

I'd rather live in knowledge than in darkness, how ever ugly or frightening.

I'd rather know what my neighbors MAY be thinking and doing and be armed and informed...

 

[Zurg]

I do not see how a mechant choosing to sell or not a product counts as censorship, I think it is closer to an editorial decision.

Like a paper choosing what to print. Everything doesn't get in the Times, the Times chooses. The issue is who does the choosing, the governmant or private market forces?

On a strictly profit motive basis the private merchant is free to choose to offer or not offer legal products. Nothing wrong with that.

Nor is there anything wrong with market participants using their freedom to choosing or not to choose to use a vendor for what ever reason they see fit.

Price, service, conveniance, other products offered specifiacly the presence of material they find offencive.

For example it is acceptable free speach for a citizen to say "Don't buy your Bible from that store the owner uses the profit to support his participation in the KKK." Just as the book store owner is with in his rights, however offensive to say "Buy you medical text books here so I can support the KKK."

The commerce of selling or not selling isn't censorship it is market forces. So is consumers choosing a vendor.

There are bounds to free speach, the classic being not having the freedon to yell fire in a crowded theater to cause a panic.

Suggesting that a consumer choosing to excersice their privilage to choose a vendor (first ammendment association) or to speak up about it (first ammendment free speach) or to express thoughts moral issues (first ammendment exercise) is censorship is a perversion of the first ammendment.

 

[EROS]

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Voltaire

 

[luv2nascar]

Anybody who wants to call me a fireman for standing up for the rights of children everywhere can do so at anytime
I'd be proud to stand next to our men and women who so freely give of themselves to protect our lives everyday
You can gladly put me next to the many firemen who lost their lives on 9/11 while gladly doing their job except I do not deserve to be called a fireman because I am not as brave as these men and women

Robinrs you have it exactly right - your words were chosen perfectly.

I think they used to call it an educated consumer not fireman.
when you chose to be informed about who you do business with and what types of products you buy.

 

[EROS]

"In Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury's classic, frightening vision of the future, firemen don't put out fires--they start them in order to burn books. Bradbury's vividly painted society holds up the appearance of happiness as the highest goal--a place where trivial information is GOOD, and knowledge and ideas are BAD . Fire Captain Beatty explains it this way, "Give the people contests they win by remembering the words to more popular songs.... Don't give them slippery stuff like philosophy or sociology to tie things up with. That way lies melancholy.""

 

[Saffron]

Suggesting that a consumer choosing to excersice their privilage to choose a vendor (first ammendment association) or to speak up about it (first ammendment free speach) or to express thoughts moral issues (first ammendment exercise) is censorship is a perversion of the first ammendment.

Very well said Zurg.