Reply With Quote
I'll admit that my tagging example wasn't the best put together.
She basically got a slap on the hand, sounds like they were just trying to make a point but didn't exactly do a great job of doing that.
I'm just wondering how her stories were any different from books or movies that have children being raped or murdered in them...
Let's say for example the book Pure Murder:
"The crime itself is almost too frightening to believe and Mitc paints a most vivid depiction. I'm glad he does because it made me realize how truly de able these young men were and how horribly they assaulted, raped, mutilated, and finally killed these two sweet teenage girls."
Is that ok because it's non-fiction?
I'll admit that my tagging example wasn't the best put together.
I may be a "dumb ", but I'm a "dumb " with guns.
These weren't rich children, they were poor children who's parents made minimum wage. Does that change your opinion?
Obscenity is bull . Writing demented stories is not a crime against anyone. There is no victim. I hate how in this country no one wants to assign responsibility to the criminal anymore. If someone reads a story and goes and tortures a child, it's still his choice and not the writer's. This is like dumbass Tipper Gore trying to ban Ice-T's work because some idiots have to go and bust a cap. That's just bull . Whatever happened to the simple "that guy's crazy"?
Missed this earlier.
Yes, I'd be fine with it. Just like I'm fine with Hollywood making movies about killing the President, terrorist plots against our country, serial killers, etc.
I just want to know what laws have been broken. A private citizen sold her private works to other private citizens via a private medium(pay site). Are Tom Clancy and VC Andrews next? The cast of L&O: SVU?
Who is the victim in this? Whose liberties have been infringed upon? It's not ing real, for Christ's sake.
Why is fic ious child rape/molestation considered more criminal than a fic ious assassination plot of the President?
I mean wtf. You guys think you can stop people from thinking these things?
The Marquis de Sade would say hasn't changed in 200 years.
When you look at the history of literature, there are many books that people tried to stop from being published that are considered classic works of literature today.
Wow there are some really weak arguments in here.
And there are many excellent books where children were defiled or murdered. Just like there are many excellent books where good honest adults are brutally slaughtered. Look at the hundreds of books on World War II and Nazi concentration camps. If you are so naive you want stuff like that banned, then please do the world a favor and don't vote.
Wrong is the word you're looking for... not "wasn't the best put together", W R O N G! It has absolutely no merit. When tagging is illegal, it is so because its vandalism like people have already pointed out in here, not because its a free speech issue. You thinking its fundamentally the same means you're wrong.
+1
I might add that the Marquis de Sade books (now considered a classic) opened the subject for debate and study, which in turn lead to a better understanding of such human behavior.
I'm still surprised at Buddy's premises in one of the earliest post, where he says that free speech should be adapted to and limited by current moral values.
That is in fact the most dangerous premise of this whole thread. Free speech must be absolute and unequivocal, since adaptation of fundamental rights to the moral guidelines "du jour", is what made atrocities like Hitler's final solution not only possible but also acceptable.
Buddy Holly comparing freedom of speech to tagging is Charles-Oakley-on-Oprah-esque.
All I know is that this thread ing delivered.
I think Manny made a great point when he stated that most people in general would stray from supporting this women not based on the fact that she went beyond free speech (which I don't think she did) but more based on the fact that they wouldn't want the content associated with themselves. Which furthermore showcases exactly how re ed and blind the world we live in is.
Had this women wrote the exact same material and landed a full feature mega movie starring well know actors and actresses we wouldn't even be debating this. She'd probably earn some kind of "high honor" or prestigious award for depicting her horrific past via money making theatre. They'd call it creative and genius.
You can't pick and choose from works of fiction whats more acceptable than the next. We might as well stop people from purchasing all kinds of excessive luxury items deemed over the top....then we can start rationing bread and water. Not to mention that we'd be missing out on great works of art like Saw 1.2 and 3 maybe 4.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
