corollary to ryan's pornographer thread

[runner]

ryan's thread reminds me of a discussion i saw on another board.

should groups like NAMBLA be allowed to organize, exist and discuss their "interests?"

(here's how they promote themselves: )


WELCOME! The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) was formed in 1978. It was inspired by
the success of a campaign based in Boston's gay community to defend against a local witchhunt.

NAMBLA's goal is to end the extreme oppression of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships by:

building understanding and support for such relationships;

educating the general public on the benevolent nature of man/boy love;

cooperating with lesbian, gay, feminist, and other liberation movements;

supporting the liberation of persons of all ages from sexual prejudice and oppression.



i think most people would agree that the concept of man-boy love, be it consensual or not, is reprehensible. however, doesn't the group constitutionally have rights to assemble and to free speech? (is Schenk v. U.S. relevant here?) and yet they're advocating something (statutory rape, minimum...we won't even get into the sodomy) that is illegal everywhere.

just wanna' see what y'all's opinions are.

 

[Pimp C]

IMO, no those sick fucks should not be able to organize, thats just wrong.

 

[JohnnyO]

Well, they are assembling to discuss illegal activities. I wonder if we do that here at Elite??

 

[May1010]

This is not a question of free speech. It is a child protection issue. I'm willing to be relieved of some of my civil liberties to protect children (since they can not protect themselves).

Hence, an organization such as NAMBLA should not be allowed to exist.

In addition, I read about that man writing about child pornography and torture in today's paper. I believe that his narratives discussing abusing and tortuing children may be a precursor to his acting out on his desires.

Hence, he is a physical threat to children and as such, should be incarcerated in a mental institution.

 

[RyanH]

Clearly advocating and reducing to practice are two entirely different concepts.

In Schenck, the Supreme Court held that the issue was whether words are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger of an evil that Congress has the power to prevent.

Thus, the issue here is whether that group's conduct creates a clear and present danger.

This is, of course arguable, and would ultimately be a jury issue, I would suspect.

I don't see how broadly advocating goals such as those listed would present a clear and present danger. Note that none of the goals stated a command----go out and have sex with young boys.

Interesting post.

 

[May1010]

Ryan -


Have you ever read a NAMBLA newsletter or read any of its essays? Obviously not. I have. They promote sexual relationships between men and boys. Hence, they are a clear and present danger.

 

[RyanH]

Hence, he is a physical threat to children and as such, should be incarcerated in a mental institution.

May, how can you make a logical jump from fantasy to reality. Thoughts pose no threat to children, that's silly.

 

[Warik]

If someone started an organization called the North American Government Official Assassination Association where everyone sat around and talked about killing government officials, they'd be in endlessly deep trouble. They would be assembling to discuss, and possibly, participate in, illegal activities. This filthy "man-boy 'love' " garbage is illegal, consentual or not. There is no excuse for allowing such an organization to publically exist.

-Warik

 

[JohnnyO]

But don't WE discuss illegal activities?? What's the difference between us and them?

 

[RyanH]

Warik, you do bring up an interesting point, but

your "garbage" argument fails. What one considers garbage, the other doesn't...it's all very subjective.

Plus, a group of assassins are clearly much more of clear and present danger than an abstract group promoting a change in lifestyle between men and boys. Is there any proof that any members of this group have actually molested boys? If so, that would probably change the outcome...