backtop


Print 130 comment(s) - last by vortmax2.. on Jan 13 at 12:18 PM


Some think that the Pedophilia e-Book, penned by a Colorado resident (left) is a misguided publicity stunt.  (Source: Amazon/Gawker)

Apparently many people downloaded the book, after it became a hot news topic. It reached #65 on Amazon's e-Book bestsellers list.  (Source: 4Chan)
Did publisher violate its own censorship policy

"Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable.  Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions."

That's the official corporate stance on censorship listed on Amazon.com's website.  However, the world's largest online book retailer waffled on Monday first pulling, then reinstating, then pulling again a controversial book on pedophilia that had become an overnight bestseller.

Most would find the $4.97 USD book, The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure (link is likely broken), morally reprehensible.  The book slipped by Amazon's watchful eye under its new self-publishing system.

The book features disturbing details like how to make condoms from rubber gloves and poorly structured philosophical rants in defense of the abusive and illegal practice.

When tech bloggers first took notice, the book was sitting in 158,221st place on Amazon.com's e-book sales list -- in other words it had sold virtually no copies.  Despite its utter lack of sales many sites outraged called for a boycott of Amazon.com.  Their campaign had quite the opposite effect, propelling the book upwards to eventually reach #65 on Amazon.com's best-selling list of e-books, with sales jumping an incredible (and disturbing) 101,000 percent.

That led Amazon.com, after initially defending the book, to finally pull it late Monday for the first time.  It appears that the book's brief reappearance may have been due to the site not having pulled the book properly from all of its many data centers.

The book is the work of Phillip Greaves II, a 42-year-old unemployed manic-depressive who resides in Pueblo, Colo.  Mr. Greaves claims the book is based on his childhood sexual experiences and that he is not a pedophile.  Some of his contents indicate that he may have written the book as a publicity stunt.  He told ABC News in an interview, "I can see where they would come to that kind of conclusion and to a certain extent I wanted that kind of notoriety to effect the book. ... I wanted it to effect sales."

The decision to pull the book, no matter how disgusting it was, is a controversial one as it represents Amazon.com being forced to seemingly violate its own censorship code. 

Amazon.com currently publishes a number of other titles that seem to advocate or defend illegal, violent, and immoral acts.  Among those is the $14.85 title I Am the Market: How to Smuggle Cocaine by the Ton, in Five Easy Lessons, penned by Luca Rastello a convicted drug smuggler.  Another controversial work is Mein Kampf Adolf Hitler's book advocating racial murder and genocide, which is available for $2.99.

The site has not yet released an official comment revealing why it pulled the book after initially defending it.  A group on Facebook advocating a boycott of Amazon.com until it pulled the book is at 9,500+ "likes" as of Tuesday morning.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Mein Kampf
By RugMuch on 11/11/2010 11:05:51 AM , Rating: 5
I own Mein Kampf. I will probably own this book just because of the stink it produced.

Why don't we just burn books we don't like?

Really people.




RE: Mein Kampf
By mcnabney on 11/11/2010 11:09:42 AM , Rating: 2
You have got to read the Facebook thread on the link that Jason included!


RE: Mein Kampf
By RugMuch on 11/11/2010 11:15:29 AM , Rating: 2
Oh, did mention I know the author I from Puexico or P-Town.


RE: Mein Kampf
By Ammohunt on 11/11/2010 2:16:16 PM , Rating: 2
He is from Pueblo that explains alot!


RE: Mein Kampf
By RugMuch on 11/11/2010 2:52:47 PM , Rating: 2
Where u from the springs? Ew if so.


RE: Mein Kampf
By Ammohunt on 11/11/2010 4:50:20 PM , Rating: 2
I am a Citizen of the World like Obama!


RE: Mein Kampf
By Gul Westfale on 11/11/2010 5:58:55 PM , Rating: 3
in amazon's defense:
i published a book called "Methods of Suicide" earlier this year and smashwords, which distributes books to apple ibooks and the sony reader store among others, refused to carry it.
amazon, on the other hand, has never even contacted me about this being a problem; they really do not believe in censorship.

i do think that we (the authors as well as amazon customers) should be given an explanation for this decision, though. smashwords were kind enough to advise me of their decision on my book, and although i disagree with it i have to say that it's their company, and they can run it as they see fit. amazon has stated that they do not believe in censorship, so an explanation simply must be forthcoming... or they should stop claiming that they are against censorship, and give authors and publishers clear guidelines.

and for what it's worth...
http://www.amazon.com/Methods-Suicide-Banned-ebook...


RE: Mein Kampf
By ekv on 11/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: Mein Kampf
By guffwd13 on 11/12/2010 3:22:46 PM , Rating: 1
But he won in the name of capitalism!

Praise he who hath taken advantage of opportunity. No different really than Rush Limbaugh or Howard Stern.

God Bless America.


RE: Mein Kampf
By ekv on 11/12/2010 3:38:55 PM , Rating: 2
Right. I seriously doubt Rush Limbaugh is a pedo.

Stern probably has pedo's on his show frequently, which may explain your lack of discernment, no?


RE: Mein Kampf
By adiposity on 11/15/2010 12:48:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Right. I seriously doubt Rush Limbaugh is a pedo.\


Yeah, you can't be a drug addict AND a pedo. Right?


RE: Mein Kampf
By ekv on 11/15/2010 1:22:35 PM , Rating: 2
Further baseless accusations and innuendo.

But more importantly, you completely ignore Phillip Greaves II and what he has actually done. Perhaps you forgot? Or, more likely, you completely agree with his not-so-hidden agenda. Pervert.


RE: Mein Kampf
By adiposity on 11/15/2010 1:38:11 PM , Rating: 2
huh?


RE: Mein Kampf
By ekv on 11/15/2010 5:29:50 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. You don't even know who Greaves is.... Pathetic.


RE: Mein Kampf
By adiposity on 11/16/2010 12:26:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Exactly. You don't even know who Greaves is.... Pathetic.


I know who he is. I was talking about Rush. I have no reason to think he's a pedo, just as you no reason to think he's not. I was making a joke, which you apparently didn't like.


RE: Mein Kampf
By ekv on 11/16/2010 1:04:50 PM , Rating: 2
wooops. My apologies. I suspected that's where you were going with this, but for some reason it just didn't quite add up. Again, my apologies.


RE: Mein Kampf
By BernardP on 11/11/2010 11:34:03 AM , Rating: 2
I read Mein Kampf when I was 12... Borrowed it from one of my friends. It's easy to agree on a given starting line for censorship (eg: pedophilia), but impossible to agree on an end point: Hitler's ideas? doubts about the Holocaust? racism? polygamy? sex with animals? the all-encompassing "hate speech"? Take your pick.


RE: Mein Kampf
By RugMuch on 11/11/2010 12:02:59 PM , Rating: 2
What this about polygamy?

Are you saying you are for or against?

I mean if were going to pick one.


RE: Mein Kampf
By amanojaku on 11/11/2010 1:27:37 PM , Rating: 5
For polygamy
1 - Greater potential for sex
2 - More choices for an escort, e.g.
business function - the high maintenance arm candy
sports bar - the girl you actually sleep with cuz she likes beer, sports and sex
3 - More maids ("hey! you get your b1tch ass back in the kitchen and make me some pie!")

Against polygamy
1 - More nagging
2 - More conversations
3 - More "you've had enough (sex, beer, tv, pork chops, action figures, etc...)"
4 - More bills
5 - More "er, yeah, you could probably fit in that dress, maybe"
6 - More stuff to carry from the mall

Polygamy doesn't look so good all of a sudden.


RE: Mein Kampf
By lennylim on 11/11/2010 1:35:49 PM , Rating: 5
You left out : more mothers in law.


RE: Mein Kampf
By xsilver on 11/12/2010 6:20:10 AM , Rating: 2
you could fix that if you marry sisters but then you're in another moral conundrum...


RE: Mein Kampf
By Ammohunt on 11/11/2010 2:28:08 PM , Rating: 2
I bid on a 1930ies era copy of Mein Kampf in German on Ebay. Ebay pulled it before the auction could finish! For the record I only wanted to own a copy for its historical significance.


RE: Mein Kampf
By geddarkstorm on 11/11/2010 2:55:14 PM , Rating: 5
I'd buy it just so I could read it while sitting on mein kampfy chair.


RE: Mein Kampf
By RivuxGamma on 11/11/2010 9:02:58 PM , Rating: 2
I was always fond of Me In Kamp F. I think they used that in Churchill: The Hollywood Years.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1133745664/tt0359078


RE: Mein Kampf
By RivuxGamma on 11/11/2010 8:47:16 PM , Rating: 2
I did. I burned the dictionary/thesaurus that my roommate threw at my head.

I love the smell of cheap book paper and alcohol in the morning.


Censorship
By DukeToma on 11/11/2010 1:28:24 PM , Rating: 3
Why do people insist on confusing censorship (done by governments) with simply not wanting to be associated with objectionable material?! Amazon is not in a position to censor this book. They certainly are within their rights to refuse to distribute it. Now if the government came in and busted down Amazon's doors and all other publisher's in the United States and rounded up the book and burned it, that would be censorship.

That's not what's happening. Amazon does not have to sell what it doesn't want to sell.




RE: Censorship
By foolsgambit11 on 11/11/2010 3:41:16 PM , Rating: 3
I absolutely agree that Amazon has the right to choose what it wants to sell. However, Amazon considers what they did censorship:
quote:
Amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. Amazon does not support or promote hatred or criminal acts, however, we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions.
While on the issue of this particular book, I don't much care if Amazon de-lists it or not (I'm not going to be buying it), it does bother me that Amazon would go back on its own policy.

Frankly, while I understand why people are outraged, I think their anger is a little unreasonable - it's hard to imagine there are any would-be paedophiles out there who have only been waiting for a how-to guide to start raping children. And plenty of books on Amazon are how-to guides on committing crimes. Heck, in some of the Socratic dialogues, Socrates is effectively convincing a boy to come to come to bed with him. Should we ban those?

Finally, I'd suggest that everyone should read John Stuart Mill's essay "On Liberty", which lays out a very good argument that social censorship (that which is done outside the realm of government) is just as, if not more, evil than government censorship. He may have been a little naïve and high-minded, but his principles and observations are a good starting point for any discussion on the limits of the freedom of speech.


RE: Censorship
By JediJeb on 11/11/2010 6:07:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
very good argument that social censorship (that which is done outside the realm of government) is just as, if not more, evil than government censorship


I disagree with this, social censorship should be the acceptable form. What it does is build groups where like thinkers converge. If you don't agree with the norm of the local group, then you join another that adheres to your specific system of beliefs. For me a place like San Francisco would be to liberal minded and I would not feel comfortable living there. And I imagine that if I were to go there and voice my beliefs I would be censored pretty heavily. If everyone else there disagrees with my point of view then the only reason I would have to stay there would be to act as a thorn in the side of the community, which in the long run only causes problems. The idea that beliefs that are not the norm for a local society should be forced into that society to make it more open is one of the things that causes so much unrest in the world now. Look how well that went in the Soviet Union where they tried to make all the different social groups from all the smaller nations they absorbed get along. It was only the threat of severe punishment that kept all those different groups together and once that was gone they split up back into their own smaller nations.

Humans are not made with cookie cutter personalities and beliefs, and to believe the entire world will somehow become a place where every person accepts the beliefs of every other person and lives in harmony is the biggest pipe dream ever. Wars usually don't start when people are allowed to group into their separate distinct communities, they usually start when one group tries to force its ways into that of another. Sharing of ideas across the borders of these groups is ok, but if the idea is rejected it should be left at that instead of trying to "enlighten by force" like many social groups try to do.


RE: Censorship
By superstition on 11/14/2010 8:30:04 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, everyone living in San Francisco is an ultra-liberal robot from the same assembly line. They send each other Nancy Pelosi cards and refuse to eat anything other than organic tofu.

I thought the Jedi were supposed to be fairly intelligent?

(P.S. There are almost no actual liberals in the USA. What are called liberals are really centrists. That includes Ms. Pelosi. But, shhh, don't tell. We have to have some scarecrows to rail against while the corporations and Wall Street bankrupt us -- with both parties lubricating the process.)


RE: Censorship
By lyeoh on 11/12/2010 8:17:12 AM , Rating: 2
Not censorship?

So say if ever the US had really tiny government (as many libertarians would like), and Big Corporations handled almost everything, would it still be considered "no censorship" if the Big Corporations refuse to publish certain books, or deliver them (they own the postal service), or let them be downloaded (they own the ISPs)?

Would stuff like the Freedom of Information act apply to them?

How about the precious US Constitution? Would they be allowed to prohibit you from bearing arms when you are standing on "private" land controlled by the Corporations? What if they owned 90% of the land?


Hey Mick
By Lord 666 on 11/11/2010 10:51:12 AM , Rating: 2
Did you buy a copy to "research?"

In all honesty, it seems to be more of a sting operation than anything. Sure, this guy could have written this book, but it was allowed to be published and sold for different intentions.




RE: Hey Mick
By JasonMick (blog) on 11/11/2010 11:01:50 AM , Rating: 2
I'm exclusively interested in adult females, so no. Did you?

Honestly I don't think this is a sting, though as buying this book in and of itself isn't illegal as far as I know. More likely a publicity stunt by Greaves and an attempt to make a quick buck (which worked). Who knows, Amazon may be paying him to keep his mouth quiet, and he may get paid off by a news network to do an exclusive interview.

That said, if you've ever watched To Catch a Predator, you realize just how many of these creeps there are out there, so I'd imagine not ALL of the sales were from people just buying it as a joke.


RE: Hey Mick
By SiliconJon on 11/11/2010 4:17:03 PM , Rating: 2
Don't forget some people aim to fight problems by understanding the problem which will require immersion (in whatever degree chosen) into the issue they wish to fight. That being said my failure to purchase said item does not mean I do not wish to address the problem.


RE: Hey Mick
By SiliconJon on 11/11/2010 4:22:43 PM , Rating: 2
Reading my post I should clarify that "whatever degree chosen" should not be taken so far as to participate! I didn't mean to include that path, for that would be rationalization. But there are more study methods than just reading an alleged condolence and guidance manual.


Let the people decide
By FriedrichW on 11/11/2010 2:34:37 PM , Rating: 2
If we truly believe in a free market system then Amazon should have the right to sell what ever it wants. If we truly believe in the protection of the 1st amendment then the author has a right to publish the book. If we truly believe that the content of this book is detrimental to society then we don't buy it, don't give it publicity to heighten its profile, and let it fade in obscurity.

Obviously, this book has struck a nerve with a lot of parents and survivors of abuse and the have the right to protest its sale through boycott. But was was it right for Amazon to pull the book from the site? There was a poll on this question not to long ago on this http://my-take.com/poll/Do-you-think-Amazon-was-ri... Amazon is just a marketplace and can't screen the content of all the books they sell for objectionable material. It's up for the consumer to decide to boycott it or not. I just hope they realize that this attention will give the book the extra publicity it doesn't need.




RE: Let the people decide
By JakLee on 11/11/2010 4:57:32 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Amazon is just a marketplace and can't screen the content of all the books they sell for objectionable material.


While I can see that point of view, it is a little naive to think that a business, such as this company Amazon is, would not and should not be allowed affect policy that can effect their sales, their bottom line.

It is a bit disingenuous to say they have to make solid rules that can never have any exceptions made. I don't agree with the subject matter, nor do I like the fact that Amazon pulled the book, but I do not fault a business for making a decision like this.

A company should be able to say they are not willing to offer something (like a book in this case) and if enough people do want to read this, another publisher will be willing publish it. Ther Government did not "ban" this, book, Amazon did not "ban" this book, from the looks of it no one "banned" this book. Amazon just chose to remove their involvement in it.


RE: Let the people decide
By kalak on 11/16/2010 9:29:03 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Amazon should have the right to sell what ever it wants

WRONG
quote:
the author has a right to publish the book

WRONG
quote:
If we truly believe that the content of this book is detrimental to society then we don't buy it, don't give it publicity to heighten its profile, and let it fade in obscurity.

WRONG again....

We have to PUNISH people that spread ideas like that. They DON'T have the "right" to say whatever they want or write whatever they want. Liberty is NOT Anarchy.


"Almost No Copies"?
By MozeeToby on 11/11/2010 11:05:05 AM , Rating: 2
158,221st place is out of 750,000+ according to the Kindle app on my phone. I suppose it's possible that the bottom 600,000 books sell almost nothing, but it seems to me like he must have been selling at least a few copies a day.




By superstition on 11/14/2010 8:33:07 PM , Rating: 2
Or was it about sex with adolescents?

Ephebophilia, for instance, is commonly (and completely erroneously) conflated with pedophilia in American culture.

Hebephilia, unlike ephebophilia, is confusion as it verges on pedophilia.




Leave it up
By Mitch101 on 11/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: Leave it up
By mcnabney on 11/11/2010 11:01:49 AM , Rating: 4
How about not.

Free speech exists to protect speech and writing that the majority hates. The mere purchase (or reading) of this book is no more disgusting than the numerous books that glorify murder and violence. I personally abhore the Turner Diaries, but I would never think of banning it.


RE: Leave it up
By twhittet on 11/11/2010 12:26:59 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Plus - my guess is that a majority of the people who bought it are bible thumpers or writers looking for something to complain about. They will buy it, and then tell everyone it should be banned from ever being sold.


RE: Leave it up
By SiliconJon on 11/11/2010 4:19:52 PM , Rating: 2
While there will be plenty who bought the book in an attempt to further educate their selves in the battle against pedophilia it will not be the common "bible thumper", for they protest with their eyes closed from what I tend to notice.


RE: Leave it up
By ekv on 11/11/2010 4:58:59 PM , Rating: 2
Also against pedophilia. But the remark about eyes closed ... ?


RE: Leave it up
By Fritzr on 11/12/2010 1:25:12 AM , Rating: 2
Meaning in this case:
Read the title, listen to the tirades of others and then declare themselves experts on the book in question without having read anything beyond the title.

This is sometimes done to show their exceptional purity as they campaign to remove what they believe they would find objectionable IF they ever actually read the material they are objecting to.


RE: Leave it up
By ekv on 11/12/10, Rating: 0
RE: Leave it up
It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: It's a sad time...
By wordsworm on 11/11/2010 11:24:25 AM , Rating: 5
I don't remember reading anywhere in the Bible that it's a sin to copulate with what is today considered a minor. I'm sure that Solomon had a few dozen wives/concubines whom we'd consider under age today.


RE: It's a sad time...
By mcnabney on 11/11/2010 11:33:12 AM , Rating: 4
The bible is full of horrific ideas. Incest and paedophilia is just the tip of the iceberg.

Psalm 138 v8
God, remember those Edomites,
and remember the ruin of Jerusalem,
That day they yelled out,
”Wreck it, smash it to bits!”
And you, Babylonians—ravagers!
A reward to whoever gets back at you
for all you’ve done to us;
Yes, a reward to the one who grabs your babies
and smashes their heads on the rocks!


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: It's a sad time...
By lennylim on 11/11/2010 1:39:28 PM , Rating: 3
You could point out that he really meant Psalm 137:7, a minor mistake, instead of making it sound like he fabricated the passage.


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: It's a sad time...
By mcnabney on 11/11/2010 4:37:36 PM , Rating: 1
So which is it?

If it is in there, and you like it, it is the 'Word of God'.
If it is in there, and you don't like it, it isn't.


RE: It's a sad time...
By JediJeb on 11/11/2010 6:15:49 PM , Rating: 4
I think the key idea there is context. What was the context in which some part is written.

Example,

Kill all the babies.

or

When the king said, "Kill all the babies" he was evil.

Taken out of context that phrase has a totally different meaning. You can't just quote text without explaining the whole context in which it is written, that is how so many crazy ideas are put forth as the "Word of God" when they really aren't. I would suggest one not quote or condemn until one has read and understands the context.


RE: It's a sad time...
By sprockkets on 11/11/2010 1:57:21 PM , Rating: 1
Not sure what your point is as this is spoken from the perspective of a captive Jew in Babylon waiting for God to liberate them, which he did by using the Medes and Persians.

Of course, if you think this passage applies to literal Babylon, you are mistaken, as this has a much greater fulfillment.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/11/2010 5:14:13 PM , Rating: 3
"Incest and paedophilia" are condemned in the Bible

But what are you really trying to say? Are you insinuating that the Bible glorifies these atrocious actions? that it condones these atavistic, repugnant behaviours?

... not from what I've read.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Indigo64 on 11/12/2010 1:02:06 PM , Rating: 1
Ah yes, Red text in the bible. Some loon ran out of black ink when writing that stuff into his spiral notebook (at the time spirals were the legs of dead spiders woven into the pages) so he switched to red ink. Jesus said "dawg, what's up with dat red ink?" To which the guy replied, "I ran out of ink, it's a mess." So Jesus replies, "The guy in my head upstairs says that the red ink could be his ink, so yo, make the red words mean the voice of God!"

Note that in this reenactment Jesus is Hey-Soos. Stupid text.


RE: It's a sad time...
By JasonMick (blog) on 11/11/2010 11:34:13 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
I don't remember reading anywhere in the Bible that it's a sin to copulate with what is today considered a minor. I'm sure that Solomon had a few dozen wives/concubines whom we'd consider under age today.


While you're probably correct that some Biblical relationships would be considered underaged by today's standards, that doesn't make them moral. The Bible also sends a mixed message on slavery as many early Judeo-Christian religious leaders kept slaves and the Bible discusses beating guidelines to beating your slave (though also appearing to criticize slavery in other passages).

e.g.:
quote:
Exodus 21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.


Clearly, though both pedastry and slavery are both immoral (and illegal) abusive practices.

I don't think the Bible has much if anything to do with this story, though. I guess at best you could try to argue that the Bible should not be the only guide of one's morality, considering certain questionable assertions, particularly in the Old Testament.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/11/2010 5:52:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
the Bible discusses beating guidelines
Umm, you quoted from the King James Version. You may be misunderstanding the old english used there. Try the New International Version or the New American Standard version. E.g.
quote:
21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property.
quote:
21"If, however, he survives a day or two, no vengeance shall be taken; for he is his property.
My point is that, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe the Bible speaks to the owner as well as the slave. Slavery back then was common. But even today, you serve a master, like Dylan's song [you're gonna have to serve somebody]. I guess I'm being existential

It's not like th Bible is saying "here's how to whoop on this dude." 8) No, from the Biblical perspective we all belong to God, in essence we are slaves. [Some choose not to recognize that relationship, kind of like telling your boss to shove it, in this economy]. So, if you have been graced with good fortune and you own slaves, treat them appropriately. Keep the Golden Rule in mind. Btw, same idea if you own a business, give your hard-working employees a raise and whoop the slackers. Hint, hint.

That's my take on Exodus 21:20-21.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Kurz on 11/12/2010 10:28:39 AM , Rating: 2
Who has the power in today's relationship?
Most employee's have power over their boss (You call them masters). You usually do what they say, however if they step out of line they can ruin the relationship. The employee can decide to walk away and take with him knowledge, skills that he gained on the job.

Its a loss on the employeer and the employee can easily find another employement.

Though you could argue the politicans have power over us, and force laws to inhibit our rights.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/12/2010 1:45:58 PM , Rating: 2
Notice I said, "in this economy". Tried looking for work lately? If you're in the computer field, I can find 25 people in the immediate area -- small town by the way -- that would be interested in the job. If you work in the service industry, ha ha, 50 over-qualified people. Etc.

Indeed, who has the power?


RE: It's a sad time...
By Kurz on 11/12/2010 4:04:31 PM , Rating: 2
Government does and its what created the bubble and the market distortions.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Kurz on 11/12/2010 4:09:01 PM , Rating: 2
Government has the power I mean.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/12/2010 4:27:52 PM , Rating: 2
We agree on "distortions". We disagree on "power". Neither of which addresses Jason's "questionable assertions".

If you will, the Bible points out we are in relationship to God. We ought to act appropriately. Pederasty, by extension, is a grossly abusive, shameful relationship. It ought to be expunged and condemned, no?


RE: It's a sad time...
By Kurz on 11/12/2010 5:26:23 PM , Rating: 2
Pederasty depends highly on the current social norms.
Currently its viewed as evil, disgusting act, there are points in history where its viewed as perfectly normal.

All in point depends on the parties involved.
If the parents view Pederasty as normal and they believe their child can grow from the relationship why the hell shouldn't they have that decision. Forcing a set of beliefs on a people is not considered liberty. If both parties are willing why should we get involved?

Though currently there its shameful to be gay and have intercourse with someone below the legal age.

Currently we are a society of victims with little to no self respect. Personally though I would never condone Pederasty, though I am biased in my own beliefs.

Going back to the power aspect:
Though who has the power to distort society is the Government, the ones who are in the minority have the most say. Instead of respecting each other's rights we trample on each other by forcing one group to pay more, claiming they extort the less wealthy.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/13/2010 3:09:34 AM , Rating: 2
And here you are defending pederasty. Do you think you're somehow more noble, or more open-minded because of it? What could possibly propel you to condone something so vile?

Do you have the slightest clue as to what drives a pedophile? There are people in this world that get off on lying to others. Meaning, in this case, some guy is lying to an innocent child about what happens when the zipper comes down. Talk about forcing a set of beliefs on somebody. O wait, I suppose you want to say that's not "forcing". Then what the hell is it? salesmanship? Such a thought process is beyond vulgar, it's poison.

This is a huge step back. You may think your history teacher is the schnizzle but progressive thought here is not going forward and empowering the individual. To defend pederasty is going in the wrong direction. And you apparently have to do that, because you depend on "current social norms." I'd rather depend on the Bible which presents a moral framework for going forward -- something new instead of the same old crap that's been tried for the last thousands of years.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Kurz on 11/13/2010 8:19:58 AM , Rating: 2
You love to Strawman don't you?
My beliefs don't fit in your little scope of the world so you have to say I don't have a clue what drives a pedophile, or lying is somehow moral to me? Plus you completely misread my condone statement to fit your perception of me.

I am the most conservative when it comes to individual rights. I am a libertarian on many issues. So likewise I am not a fan of laws dictating what people can do with each other willingly in the privacy of their own homes.

If someone wants to hit up on a pipe of cocaine so be it.
If the two parties, the parents of said child and the pedophile guy wants to engage in equal relationship I have no problem with it.

And the child knows full well what he/she is getting from the encounter I have no problem with it. Its the act of force through lying, manipulation, etc is wrong and should be prosecuted. A pedophile lying to a child to get sex is committing rape.

LOL you should try to find that passage where the bible condemns Pedophilia. Now it cant be kind of, it has to be explicit. "Laying with a child is wrong".

The Bible isn't the end all be all. You have to look at the individuals of a situation. If both parties are for it then there is no problem. As long as there is no coercion.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/13/2010 11:56:04 AM , Rating: 2
Apparently you just don't get it. You're still defending and condoning pederasty. As in "I have no problem with it." You accuse me of setting up a Strawman, of misreading, of prejudice, but you don't even know what you're writing?

You are insane -- or just pre-law -- if you think a child knows full well what they are getting out of such a relationship. As I said, you haven't the slightest clue.

http://www.gotquestions.org/pedophilia.html

In the Bible, you have Jewish people called Pharisees. They were followers of the Law. They delighted in splitting hairs, as it were, in debating the finer points of the Law. This guy comes along, Jesus of Nazereth, and they don't like his statements. They set a trap for Him, "Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay the imperial tax to Caesar or not?” Innocent question, no? That passage in Matt 22:15-22, and in subsequent paragraphs points out the error of your ways. Are you trying to attain to a higher, more noble ideal, e.g. serving God, or simply assuage the letter of the law.

A man and a woman come together. They like each other. However, she's married. But the two write up and agree on a contract, without coercion. The contract is a contract ... on her husband. Both parties "are for it", so what's the problem? Let's say you amend your statement to "All parties are for it then there is no problem". Try that distortion with Congress.

Instead of putting me on trial, try putting the pedo on trial. I'll give you the last word.


RE: It's a sad time...
By lyeoh on 11/12/2010 8:48:19 AM , Rating: 2
The laws dealing with wars and slavery have to be taken in context.

In those days it was common to take slaves during war, instead of just killing everyone- which was also common practice in war by most countries then. It was a pretty effective way of avoiding "insurgencies" and reprisals - e.g. they come back later and wipe you out because you didn't wipe them out and enslave the rest. Yes it sucks, but war sucks. It's only when people become more civilized that you can have more civilized war ;).

Also selling yourself as a slave was a method of getting support when you were too poor, and for Israelite slaves it would last a maximum of seven years. Debts were cancelled every 7 years too. And every 50 years, all the farm land reverted to the original owners (which prevents one party from become so powerful as to control the entire food supply).

One should actually be happy that certain "judeo-christian" conventions have become so pervasive.

Because in most other cultures/societies the King had absolute power. He could do anything he wanted to you, unless you had an army more powerful than his.

Whereas in Israel, a king though powerful was still bound by the law - he couldn't even _legally_ seize property of others, or have sex with other people's wives. Yes a few still did it, but it was still considered wrong, and so David and Ahab had to do their naughty stuff sneakily...

And very importantly an Israelite king couldn't easily change or override laws either.


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/2010 12:23:21 PM , Rating: 2
Pedophilia is defined as: a sexual desire felt by an adult for children and/or the crime of sex with a child. It's not talking about a marriage relationship with a minor...sexual desire is not the core of marriage.

Regardless...every single person in the Bible (Solomon, David, Paul, Peter, etc.) did sinful things. It doesn't mean that God liked or accepted it as good.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Kurz on 11/13/2010 9:29:49 AM , Rating: 2
It might not be the core of your marriage. Sexual desire is the core of many marriages.

Sexual desire gets people to talk and be interested in each other in the first place. Its the relationship that develops later and the refirmation of desire that usually enables marriages to last.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: It's a sad time...
By neogrin on 11/11/2010 11:37:47 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
when the lines are so blurred that we are willingly buying and selling books that promote sexual abuse of children for the sake of freedom...scary.


I see, but when the book promotes non-sexual abuse of children, it's ok, is that it?

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 <-Bible, King James version, for those that don't know.

"If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death."


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/2010 12:17:38 PM , Rating: 2
It's interesting that a quote from the Bible would cause so much negative response and attention, yet the 1st point gets almost completely ignored.

The point that the verse states is that we, as a society are at a time where we are allowing something that is clearly wrong to be propogated and deemed acceptable for the sake of freedom...


RE: It's a sad time...
By Invane on 11/11/2010 12:33:01 PM , Rating: 2
I would disagree. Pedophilia is wrong. A BOOK about pedophilia is no more wrong than a book that condones stoning a disobedient son or smashing your enemies' babies on the rocks.

The idea of free speech is that members of our society are free to express views that may differ from what the mainstream finds acceptable. While you or I may find that the author's views on pedophilia are reprehensible, I don't believe it gives us the right to try to have his viewpoint quashed under the guise of morality.

Those that want this kind of information will get it, they don't need a book on amazon to do so.


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/2010 12:47:27 PM , Rating: 1
First, the poster above has the wrong verse written...it's not Psalm 138:7-9, but 137:8.

Second, that Psalm was by King David...which was a sinner. Just because it was written in the Bible, doesn't mean God approved, accepted or condoned that behavior. In fact, God (aka Jesus Christ) states in Luke 6:27-28: “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you."

There's a difference between what a man says and what Jesus says...just trying to clarify a bit.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Anoxanmore on 11/11/2010 1:06:46 PM , Rating: 2
Neither of them are accurate quotes since neither one is real(David nor Jesus).

Now if you want to talk about the scribes that made up what David and Jesus said, that would be more fair.


RE: It's a sad time...
By sprockkets on 11/11/2010 1:59:43 PM , Rating: 2
Really? Not a real person? Even secular history disagrees with you.

Why would David not exist either?


RE: It's a sad time...
By Anoxanmore on 11/11/2010 2:21:47 PM , Rating: 2
Can you name a single secular work that mentions Jesus by name?

The only one that does is forgery by Ceasar(Josephus). (Secular history agrees with me)


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: It's a sad time...
By Anoxanmore on 11/11/2010 3:36:04 PM , Rating: 1
You mean proving existence right?(You can't disprove someone that never existed)

Either way while it has little to do with the topic at hand the OP did quote the bible, which honestly isn't exactly a good moral code. Nor should it be considered so. Those that take it literally, like yourself and the person above me, are the ones who will "doom" this civlization if you are allowed to control things. I have no desire to see a return to burning people at the stake.

Who said anything about pedophilia being acceptable? I sure don't see anyone saying that.


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 1/13/2011 12:18:34 PM , Rating: 2
Actually no, disproving. Science is all about disproving and hasn't succeeded in disproving the existence of Jesus...or God for that matter...


RE: It's a sad time...
By ImEmmittSmith on 11/11/2010 3:56:47 PM , Rating: 1
Humans are so stupid, we have events happend in history, but we repeat the same behavior and think there will be a different outcome! If you remember in the Bible why Moses was asked to build the ARK and Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, man had turned away from God and the practice of unnatural behavior was the way of life. Then God destroyed the people. One day there will be another cleansing. The moral fabric of our society has already decayed, but no one knows how bad things have to get before Christ returns.


RE: It's a sad time...
By JediJeb on 11/11/2010 6:24:52 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Moses was asked to build the ARK


Back to Sunday School for you :)


RE: It's a sad time...
By sprockkets on 11/11/2010 5:41:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only one that does is forgery by Ceasar(Josephus). (Secular history agrees with me)


Never heard of this. Josephus is a highly regarded historian.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Anoxanmore on 11/12/2010 8:22:55 AM , Rating: 1
He is, until you get to the part where Ceasar was trying to discredit him which is why that particular entry is a fraud and it is accepted as such.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/12/2010 2:03:02 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
forgery by Ceasar(Josephus)
I think you're trying to refer to Flavius Josephus. Usually just called Josephus, since he was a Jew, working as a historian under the Romans.

There is a passage where Josephus apparently affirms the divinity of Jesus. Manuscripts are consistent in this respect. Origen suggests that interpretation doesn't make sense. If you refer to the 4th century text Kitab Al-Unwan Al-Mukallal Bi-Fadail... the interpretation of the passage is then not so questionable. See S. Pines, An Arabic Version of the Testimonium Flavianum and its Implications.

You are claiming that because one passage from Josephus' writings is translated awkwardly, that his entire (extant) writings -- to wit, Against Apion, Antiquities of the Jews and Jewish Wars -- are therefore forgeries. You would have a lot of work to prove that. Go ahead and try it though, since idle hands are the devils workshop.

Pinning your hopes for defeating Christianity on such obscure and technical hermeneutics is kind of weird. I trust you realize that?

You may also want to refer to the Talmud, Pliny the Younger Letters, and Tacitus Annals.

See also,
E.F. Bruce, Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament
and
G. Habermas, The Historical Jesus, chapter 9


RE: It's a sad time...
By Anoxanmore on 11/12/2010 8:27:17 AM , Rating: 1
That passage is a forgery (wiki isn't a very good source by the way) it is accepted as such by acedemia(actual historians not those hilarious biblical kind).

I'm not out to prove Christianity isn't real. I simply do not wish to see you spread lies about something you have little knowledge about. This is self evident when you take into account you think both David (based on the old sumer myth) and Jesus (another sumer, egyptian, hindu, amongst others myths) as fact.

If you can't accept that neither one actually existed and accept their "teachings" are re-hashings of older more inclusive moral codes. You, specifically, have issues with critical thinking. This, critical thinking, was supposed to have been taught by your school that you went to, ie science class.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/12/2010 2:18:09 PM , Rating: 2
You asked a question. I answered it. You respond with ad hominem remarks.

You have no proof that Josephus is a forgery. In fact, you can't even get his name right. I suppose any historian that doesn't conform to your preconceived notions is not an "actual" historian.

I would suggest Josh McDowell's The New Evidence (that demands a verdict), but you obviously are so prejudiced you can't even get beyond Wikipedia. But of course, this explains why you are so "inclusive".

Um, Mr. Science Class, you may want to look up Charles Dawson....


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/12/2010 2:58:02 AM , Rating: 1
My apologies for the tangent, but ...
quote:
neither one is real(David nor Jesus)
If neither is real, then who is? Is Hitler real? How so? How do you know? Who told you? Did you read it in secular history? Is secular history the only trustworthy source?

Is Abigail Adams real? Is Christopher Columbus real? Is Bernard of Clairvaux real? Is Tertullian real? Is Caesar Augustus real? Is Hammurabi real? Where do you draw the line? Are the historians who wrote about these people real? Perhaps Charles Dawson is your favorite archaeologist/historian?


RE: It's a sad time...
By Belard on 11/12/2010 2:00:25 PM , Rating: 2
Er, because we know for a fact that HITLER was real, due to reliable historic documents ie: film, Audio, books, witness.

Columbus is real because again, very accurate (for its time) information about the voyage from both sides (spain & Columbus), etc.

Here's the thing, what makes "the bible" real and "Greek Mythology" not real? When all in all, general Christianity *IS* the same as Greek mythology with the difference of 1 God vs many.

There is Roman and Greek Mythology, they are almost exactly the same - but different names, since they just copied most of the ideas from the Greeks. (Zeus vs Jupiter) Christianity, Jewish and Islamic religions are similar, they come from the same era and part of the world - they they TO have many splinters Christian = Catholic, Mormon, Baptist, Methodist, Protestant, Branch Davidians, etc. With Islam, you have: Sunni and Shi'a - which are also slightly sub-divided.

If anyone one of theses is "pure", then there could only be one, which is why we have terrorist extremist. Mostly Muslim, but theres Christian terrorist too.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world and that is scary because of general degradation of women rights and strict life. But if Christians went "true hard core", they would be no different... because in the bible, women are not equal - they are slaves to men, to be bought and traded.

Thus, in general - organized religion is flawed and violent.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/12/2010 2:48:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hitler. Check. Columbus. Check. Umm, keep going? No?

The Bible is real, in part, because it claims to be real. Extra-Biblical historians, archaeology, etc., backs that claim. Greek mythology claims ... what? to be mythology.

I've no idea what you mean by "general Christianity". Reality is not the same as myth, however, monotheism vs. polytheism notwithstanding.

Christianity and Islam are not the same. They are monotheistic and that's about it. The God of Islam is not the same as the Christian God. Haven't seen too many Christians beheading reporters lately....

Because I make an absolute claim that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God, does not make me a terrorist. Your logic would have to be horribly twisted to get to that point.

Your statement "because in the bible, women are not equal" shows that you don't know what you're talking about. The reality is, since woman is (also) made in the image of God, according to the Bible, then to treat her as an, o, say, animal, would be to go against the image of God. A Christian, believing in God, does not want to go against God. Understand?

In a similar vein, children are (also) made in the image of God. Hence, pedophilia is abhorrent. In fact, a most heinous crime. I don't see how anybody can support a position in favor of pedo. You'd have to be really sick.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Belard on 11/12/2010 11:01:31 PM , Rating: 1
Check back in a day or so... I'm busy tonight...

Allah is the arabic version of "God"... so yes, its all in the same.

The "Lord of the Rings" books are real, so doest that mean that those people and monsters are real?


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/13/2010 3:29:28 AM , Rating: 2
If you're coming from an atheistic perspective, which argues without facts that the Bible is a forgery, then yes, it's "all the same." However, you might as well tell a color-blind person there's no difference tween red and green.

LOTR doesn't exactly make your point. Tolkien wrote that explicitly as myth and as a simile on the Christian life. Tolkien believed that the Bible was the revealed word of God. Hence, he believed David and Jesus are real historical people.

Are you suggesting Tolkien was unable to distinguish myth from reality? [de mortuis nil nisi bonum].


RE: It's a sad time...
By Belard on 11/14/2010 2:07:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you suggesting Tolkien was unable to distinguish myth from reality?


No, I'm saying many religious people do not. Some cultures have religion, but without the "My god has a bigger penis that yours" issues (Christians vs. Islam vs. Jews).

quote:
The Bible is real, in part, because it claims to be real. ~ backs that claim. Greek mythology claims ... what? to be mythology.


So, with that in thought, I can create my own religion & God and claim it so. Some do that today (cough) Scientology (cough) - but hey, each there own, right? Uh, Greek "mythology" was their religion and is the basis for Christianity. The way to devalue another faith if the call it a Myth or false religion. ie: You say your "God" is the one true God - a Muslim would say the same thing about Allah, with the added twist that your "god" is actually Allah and you're not doing it right - die Infidel.

Who is right, you or Muhammad that lives down the street from you?

quote:
The God of Islam is not the same as the Christian God. Haven't seen too many Christians beheading reporters lately


Both are single God mythologies that preach a loving God who still orders his believes to kill.

Dr. George Tiller, murdered by a Christian... worse yet, murdered in a Church and shot in the head by a wimp. There are the KKK/Neo Nazis, etc etc. There are Christians out there that would love it to be law to kill Pagans. And uh, the USA invaded Iraq because of what.... oh yeah, fake intel. How about the Spanish Inquisition?

"As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice." - Adolf Hitler. He wasn't that much Christian, but do believe that a rather large number of people were tortured and butchered over their race/religion.

quote:
Because I make an absolute claim that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of God, does not make me a terrorist.


I didn't say you were a terrorist. But also, out of the 1.6 billion Muslims out there, there are thousands of terrorist. Not all of them are terrorist, are they. But in general, I don't respect anyone who doesn't respect women.

quote:
The reality is, since woman is (also) made in the image of God ~~


Why is God limited to the human body form? This is human animals trying to equate them selves to a super being of some sort. There are more galaxies in the universe than there are mammals on this one tiny blue dot of a planet. One day, the Earth will dead and the universe will continue on. Really think a super-being, that in the scheme of things, we'd be like fleas... would really care if someone masturbates or who wins a football game?

Seriously, you guys really make God a rather limited "person" with nothing but human emotions. If "I" don't bow before God - he'll send me to hell... but wait wait, he supposed to have given me FREE WILL. NOT Free Will with strings attached.

Some examples of Christian God and women:
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT
"If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her." Gee thanks... with this rule, you could rape a 14yr old girl, pay for it and marry her.

Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB
"If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife."

Deuteronomy 20:10-14
"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you."

Rape the women and children? What happened to buddy Jesus?

Exodus 22:17 NAB
"You should not let a sorceress live."
That means Christine O'Donnell (Teabagger) should be burnt at the stake, she's a witch.

Leviticus 20:13 NAB
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."

Well, we see how well this country treats homosexuals here. If God created EVERYTHING, then he created homosexuality. PS: there are homosexual birds, dogs, apes, etc etc... nobody chooses to be gay.

Hosea 9:11-16 NLT
"The people of Israel are stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit. And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children."

Hosea 13:16 “their women with child shall be ripped up”

Gee... so much for the "love the children" and pro-life positions.

Jeremiah 11:22-23
God will kill the young men in war and starve their children to death.

Jeremiah 19:7-9
God will make parents eat their own children, and friends eat each other.

Theres more... but I think that's enough.

In the OLD days, religion is law. It helped us humans to survive. We didn't have POLICE to give us structure (Created by the Brits) - it was the FEAR OF GOD that helped to keep us from being total savages. We, as humans are violent... but that is also what makes us advanced. It helped us to learn more about Love.

So by all means, without religion we might not have made it this far. But we know now, that the world is a tiny thing and its our home... "God" will not save us.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/15/2010 4:42:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I can create my own religion & God and claim it so.
I wish you the best on your "new" religion. Tip: perhaps you could read up on how Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche's life concluded.

quote:
Greek "mythology" was their religion and is the basis for Christianity.
Question: what makes Greek mythology mythology?

quote:
Both are single God mythologies that preach a loving God who still orders his believes to kill.
What, are you 13? Islam does not preach a loving, fatherly God. The God of Islam is not the same as the Christian God. How many times do I have to say it? There are fundamental differences tween Islam and Christianity. The basis of Christianity is, get this, Christ. [As opposed to Greek mythology]. Jesus Christ claimed to be the Son of God. Either He is lying or He is telling the truth. That's it. That's all there is to it. Decide.

quote:
Who is right, you or Muhammad that lives down the street from you?
That's the question isn't it? Who is telling the truth? At least you made it to the party.

quote:
There are Christians out there that would love it to be law to kill Pagans.
Name one. This is such a crass insult only a spoiled little brat of unspeakable intolerance and prejudice could have even thought of it. Like I have nothing better to do in life than sit on my butt waiting for somebody with a PAGAN tat on their forehead to walk by. That's not even a good video game. Are you really that dull. And in case you are, Christians aren't called to to go out and kill Pagans, but rather make disciples [Matt. 28:19-20]. The truth is far more penetrating and enduring than mere physical manifestation.

quote:
And uh, the USA invaded Iraq because of what.... oh yeah, fake intel.
Which tells me daddy-o is a flaming liberal, or a french muslim. Except you're now in trouble because you posit the USA to be a Christian nation, even though BHO has declared that we aren't. Better watch out, better not pout, BHO's coming and he'll clean your bank account out .... [Sung to the tune of 'Santa Claus is coming to town'].

Falacious arguments, made up facts, quotes out-of-context ... false conclusion.

You have no evidence, nor credibility. You have presented no proof: proof-by-ridicule notwithstanding. David and Jesus are real historical persons. The Bible is true. Pedophilia is a crime and a sin.
quote:
Theres more... but I think that's enough.
Couldn't have said it better myself.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Skywalker123 on 11/13/2010 8:48:50 PM , Rating: 2
The Bible is real because it claims to be real? That's a great argument. I suppose the Koran is real because it claims to be real, along with all the other myths.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/14/2010 4:02:22 AM , Rating: 2
Hmm, good point. The term you're looking for is tautological argument. I wasn't intentionally using that tactic, as such, though on the surface it appears to be the case. The non-condensed version ought to have been

The Bible is real, in part, because it claims to be real, as opposed to, claiming to be myth. There are books that claim to be real and are more myth than anything. The Biblical claim to being a real historical document, in that particular sense, is backed up by archaelogical evidence and extra-Bibical historical and literary assertions.

A claim is made and it is either substantiated or not. In the Bible's case, I've investigated a lot of counter-claims and the preponderance of the evidence still weighs in favor of it, the Bible, being the truth.

The Bible has 66 books and some 50 authors though still has ... je ne sais quoi ... a consistency to it. The Koran was authored by Mohammed. It makes several subtle (and false) claims about Christianity. It also promises 72 virgins in paradise ... and "young, fresh" boys. No thanks! I don't want Islamic paradise. Of course, maybe that's your thing, no?

Look, if the Bible isn't true, if isn't real and it's all a hoax, let me out. I don't need any more battles to fight, as it were. I don't need it. I want the truth, and even then I don't want the truth except being prompted (graciously) by a 'higher authority'. The truth is defensible, it's a good friend, and everything else is just fake and worthless.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Belard on 11/14/2010 8:56:53 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I've investigated a lot of counter-claims and the preponderance of the evidence still weighs in favor of it, the Bible, being the truth.


Yeah, and Dick Cheney visiting the CIA demanding they find anything, no matter how small, even enough to break the cover of a CIA agent - to say they "have proof" of WMD in IRAQ. Hence, it doesn't make it actually true if you purposely bend a lie and say its true.

quote:
Look, if the Bible isn't true, if isn't real and it's all a hoax, let me out. I don't need any more battles to fight, as it were. I don't need it. I want the truth, and even then I don't want the truth except being prompted (graciously) by a 'higher authority'. The truth is defensible, it's a good friend, and everything else is just fake and worthless.


You do know that Santa isn't real? Must have been devastating.
Hence, extremist terrorist is born from the inability to expanding their minds beyond a single book written by dead man/men thousands of years before toilet paper and Internet porn was invented.

Here is one of my sayings:
God isn't God as proven by the flaws of Man made in his image. Someone who is perfect as "God", would have no flaws to create, nor have the criminally insane emotion of causing death and destruction because his children don't follow his every command.

It's in the bible, a father has the right to kill his son for dis-obedience. I'm not feeling the love.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/15/2010 3:20:09 AM , Rating: 2
What are you babbling about?

Does this have anything to do this blog?

If you have issues with your father, that's your problem. Not mine.

I highly recommend talking to a counselor about you're, um, you know, problem. Not a counselor at your middle school, but perhaps at a local Baptist church. As much as I try to help, "a man has got to know his limitations."


RE: It's a sad time...
By Belard on 11/15/2010 4:59:45 PM , Rating: 2
EKV said:
quote:
The Bible is real, in part, because it claims to be real. Extra-Biblical historians, archaeology, etc., backs that claim. Greek mythology claims ... what? to be mythology.


So is statement was in response to your quote as to what is real.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/15/2010 5:34:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So is statement was in response to your quote as to what is real.
Your English grammar is more like Engrish. What you've written does not parse. Just stop ... and go get help.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Belard on 11/16/2010 6:18:41 AM , Rating: 2
You miss responded.

Well... what about the killing and raping of women and children in the bible, huh?


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/16/2010 1:30:18 PM , Rating: 2
a) you're in the wrong thread [and headed downhill w/o brakes].

b) There is no such a term as "miss respond". Nor is there such a word as "misrespond". If you are trying to insinuate I answered incorrectly, you would still be wrong, especially given your snotty little attitude. Why don't you work harder in your English class.

c) go see a counselor. I reiterate, take your questions to the local Baptist (or Nazarene or EV Free) church and talk to a counselor in person.


RE: It's a sad time...
By Unspoken Thought on 11/18/2010 2:53:37 AM , Rating: 2
Just because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean that your reality will crumble as soon as you find out that you, and the little voice in your head, truly are alone in this universe.

Why do Christians get so up in arms when they feel their reality is threatened in the slightest? You can live in fear all you want but try to not to impress upon us with historically "real" written by man books to make a point of your belief system.

Thankfully more western civilizations are being exposed to other forms of philosophy and religions that we can break some of this exclusive exposer.


RE: It's a sad time...
By ekv on 11/19/2010 4:03:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
that we can break some of this exclusive exposer.
Your English / grammar is on par with the other kid. Hence I've reason to believe your critical thinking skills are equally infantile.

a) Does your reply have anything to do with this blog posting?

b) we? If I'm "truly alone in this universe" then how can you not be? Unless there's a flaw in your logic. Ok, I ought not say 'logic', I should say 'opinion'. No?

c) "but try to not to impress" But it's ok for you to impress upon me your belief system?

d) why are you putting me on trial? It's because I stand for something and you do not. It's because you're threatened by somebody actually taking a stand and censoring that filthy book. Censorship based on morality. You don't like morality to the point of accepting pedophilia. That's why you put me on trial and not Greaves.

If you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem. And perhaps you could do US a favor ... obey your user name. Thanks.


RE: It's a sad time...
By sprockkets on 11/11/2010 2:02:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Second, that Psalm was by King David...which was a sinner. Just because it was written in the Bible, doesn't mean God approved, accepted or condoned that behavior.


It wasn't written by David. David was long dead before the events described in that chapter happened, which was the destruction of Judah and the people taken captive to Babylon.


RE: It's a sad time...
By vortmax2 on 11/11/2010 3:04:57 PM , Rating: 1
You are right...my bad. It was most likely written by Jeremiah...a sinner as well though...


RE: It's a sad time...
By SilthDraeth on 11/11/2010 3:19:44 PM , Rating: 2
How is that abuse of a child?


RE: It's a sad time...
By IcePickFreak on 11/11/2010 1:07:04 PM , Rating: 2
I'd bet the majority of those sales are from minors in the first place, mainly 14-18 year old males, who thought it was hilarious. Go read any forum that has teens in it and you're bound to run across "pedobear" comments for "lulz."

Once it got noticed and posted on a tech site, as this article states, it made it's rounds across internet forums with all the kids in it and sales skyrocketed. I'd be more worried about the people that bought it before the news broke.

You think though that the author would be getting checked out by authorities though. Sorry, I'm not buying the "from my childhood experiences" bit.


RE: It's a sad time...
By IcePickFreak on 11/11/2010 3:44:53 PM , Rating: 2
Down-rated for that? There must be a pedophile in the DT crowd.


And we now
By bill4 on 11/11/10, Rating: -1
RE: And we now
By kattanna on 11/11/2010 11:06:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is a new low even for you Mick


here i disagree, IMO it should read:

quote:
This is a new low even for you Main stream media


honestly the ONLY reason this is "news" is because its being widely reported. It seems the norm nowadays that every news org has to report on every little damn thing. no matter how inane or stupid.

and about this one...

quote:
What about Westboro Baptist? Why is the liberal media so negative against them if they're anti-censorship?


yes, they have every right to protest all they want, but showing up at your childs funeral protesting against them is beyond duchebagery


RE: And we now
By JasonMick (blog) on 11/11/2010 11:12:36 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Why is he never supporting the KKK's right to sell books advising how best to lynch blacks for example?

Can you point to any KKK books on Amazon Mick? Oh, I bet they're, wait for it, censored.

What about Westboro Baptist? Why is the liberal media so negative against them if they're anti-censorship?

And lets not forget Mick recently used the Left code word for censorship, "hate groups", in a post about facebook. proving again he supports censorship by the left.

And why does Mick NEVER complain about Canadas left wing "hate speech" laws that punish even mild speaking against homosexuality?


Er. Nice rant there.

In case you were confused, I write about tech and science news. As far as I know none of your topics there entered the realm of internet topics, etc. If they did, submit them as a lead I would be interested.

Personally I find this book disgusting, just like I do Mein Kampf, but I personally feel censoring such works does virtually NOTHING to stop people from engaging in hateful and violent crime.

I think the keys to avoiding hateful violent behavior is having an educated society and a strong middle class. What did radical terrorists in the Middle East and 1930s Nazis in Germany have in common? They both were examples of how a small wealthy elite prays on hysteria of an impoverished public to further try to consolidate their wealth and power. Only the desperate by and large would compromise fundamental morality and kill for false promises of glory or paradise.

You wouldn't find most Americans falling for such a scheme, currently because America has a strong educated middle class. But we do have to be wary that it stays that way and that we promote similar prosperity in foreign nations via fair trade and limiting abusive money loaning.


RE: And we now
By MozeeToby on 11/11/2010 11:21:24 AM , Rating: 2
The KKK itself publishes a number of books that are sold through Amazon. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_1?_enco...

And like the very article says, you can find the Anti-Semite rant that is Mein Kampf. You also can find Atarashii Rekishi Kyokasho, a book which attempts to rewrite the history of Japan's actions during WWII. I have no doubt whatsoever that you can find books claiming that Women shouldn't have the right to vote or that slavery was good for black people in the American south. They might night be particularly popular, but they are there.
quote:
...left wing causes like pedophilia?

Dang it, now I've gone and fed the trolls. Oh well.


RE: And we now
By Iaiken on 11/11/2010 12:25:52 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
left wing causes like pedophilia?


Just how spun out of your head are you?

I know you think you're being clever and derogatory at the same time, but all you have demonstrated is that you are, in fact, a reprehensible moron. Your attempts to tie something as worthwhile as liberalism to something as deplorable as pedophilia is about as intellectually bankrupt as they come.

Entertaining all ends of the political and philosophical spectrum are a necessary aspect of freedom. The resulting dialogs produces the ever-changing boundaries that define the legal middle ground in which we all live. Those who act outside those laws, are punished accordingly, but there is are now laws governing the ideas that can and cannot be advocated.

Congratulations on putting your stupidity on display for the world to see.


RE: And we now
By Iaiken on 11/11/2010 12:27:53 PM , Rating: 2
bah... typing in a hurry... sorry for the atrocious use of tenses.


RE: And we now
By troysavary on 11/11/2010 12:45:57 PM , Rating: 1
It is easy for people to make the connection between leftist thought and pro-pedo propoganda, considering the history of that darling of the left, the ACLU. Remember the sting where the ACLU was caught giving advice on how to run an underage prostitution ring while avoiding paying tax on the income. Or perhaps the times that the ACLU has defended the "right" to own child porn.


RE: And we now
By Iaiken on 11/11/2010 1:44:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Remember the sting where the ACLU was caught giving advice on how to run an underage prostitution ring while avoiding paying tax on the income.


Nope, nor can I find any reference to such in any major media outlet whatsoever. Until I see credible evidence to the contrary, I'm afraid that I'm just going to have to think you are full of crap.


RE: And we now
By troysavary on 11/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: And we now
By jjmcubed on 11/11/2010 4:08:54 PM , Rating: 2
That isn't a right wing site is it???

The first statement : A queer situation exists within the United States that is putrefying at best and gives way to fierce indignation: the relationship between the American Civil Liberty Union (ACLU) and child pornography


RE: And we now
By Iaiken on 11/12/2010 11:03:40 AM , Rating: 2
If it's on a right-wing blog, it's GOTTA be true.

Seriously, these guys reek of legitimacy.

I went through the policy guides from 1990 to 1994 and I could not find the text he is "quoting". This basically tells me that he paraphrased it and twisted the original words to suit his argument against the ACLU.

Strawman at it's... best?


RE: And we now
By jjmcubed on 11/11/2010 4:06:25 PM , Rating: 3
Referring to ACORN?

Why don't you just say they are all the same? Yes, every liberal that agrees with free speech is for pedophilia. Duh!! /s

What the ACLU is for is the the right of free speech, the right of equal protection under the law, the right for due process, and the right to privacy.


RE: And we now
By troysavary on 11/11/10, Rating: 0
RE: And we now
By wordsworm on 11/11/2010 6:37:32 PM , Rating: 3
Even the crap that was posted about the ACLU in this string did not support child porn. I think someone else already stated that the quotes used came from an anti-ACLU website. In other words, unless they link to something from the ACLU, I'll conclude that it was just made up for mud slinging.

ACLU does not defend paedophilia or child pornography. What they defend is freedom of assembly.


RE: And we now
By Iaiken on 11/12/2010 11:30:29 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
ACLU does not defend paedophilia or child pornography. What they defend is freedom of assembly.


By his method of argument, the US government defends child pornography because the courts have to appoint an attorney if they cannot provide their own.

I repeat, the whole point of freedom of speech is to produce meaningful dialog. Just because the ACLU argues on behalf of something you don't agree with doesn't necessarily mean they even support it. If they argue for something unpopular and the argument is struck down or results in a further refinement of the law, then I would have to say that result of said dialog was productive because it helped solidify the boundaries.


RE: And we now
By cmdrdredd on 11/11/2010 4:03:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
something as worthwhile as liberalism


Failure at it's finest


RE: And we now
By Iaiken on 11/12/2010 11:49:15 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Failure at it's finest


A narrow mind at it's worst. Do you even know what LIBERALISM is? It is the belief in individual liberty, equal rights and right to plurality.

Liberalism produced many of the things that likely even you hold dear: constitutions and human rights, freedom of religion and separation of church/state as well as free and fair elections.

ALL philosophical aspects of government have their place, liberalism, socialism, progressivism, conservatism, corporatism and many others all have a place in how a government runs it's nation. It's the intermingling of these ideas that helps produce the boundaries in which we live.

As times and priorities change, so to does the formula of political ideas that makes the society what it is. Once upon a time, conservatism in America would have been represented by supporters of the crown while Georgie and his liberals seeking to overthrow what they saw as a tyrannical absolute monarchy.


RE: And we now
By guffwd13 on 11/12/2010 3:43:15 PM , Rating: 1
hear hear. and extension to that: the argument to end all arguments. each side exists for the other.

there is no left without right. there is no happy without sad. there is no yin without yang.

we may hate each other but without the other, what else would you be fighting for. 1984 said so too. without war, does patriotism even exist?


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki